Washington state Democrats are pushing another bill in Olympia to undermine public education here, and weaken official state learning goals and "essential academic requirements." This latest travesty comes on the heels of SB 5638, an odious attempt to more quickly and easily excuse low performers from the state's WASL tests.
The new legislation is specifically directed at minority, and low-income public school students who are failing to meet mandated state assessment standards.
House Bill 1659 tomorrow morning Feb. 9 comes before the House Education Committee. It aims to create a new Joint Select Committee On Equitable Opportunity For All; made up of legislators who would oversee research and advocacy of certain goals. These include:
"Add a fifth Washington learning goal to ensure culturally competent education;"
"Infuse multicultural education goals into the existing four Washington state learning goals;"
"Integrate multicultural...learning objectives in the Washington state essential academic learning requirements;"
"require that professional development is culturally and linguistically responsive for all staff, administration, and others;"
"...determine...the amount of additional funding needed."
Why is this committee needed? The bill's preamble cites factors including "the existing cultural paradigm," "the biases of the testing instruments," "diverse learning styles are not addressed in many schools," and because "the legislature finds that in order to close the achievement gap, the educational system will need to change how it approaches learning and teaching through a greater understanding of the impact of language, culture, race and poverty on student achievement."
HB 1659 represents the worst form of liberal Democrat pandering to minorities, and veers dangerously close to the racism it pretends to revile. The notion here is crystal clear. We need more coursework and learning goals and tests geared toward Kwaanza, the Hmong, Eritrean folk dance, Native American history, graffiti art, DJing, Malcolm X and Cesar Chavez, in order for minority kids to be interested in school and succeed.
The bill pretends to abhor "lower expectations," but actually seeks to codify them. "Relevance" in education is the ability of all students to compete with the laudable Asian immigrants in the U.S., whose children are eating everyone else's lunch academically. Japanese, Chinese and Korean kids in the U.S. especially, are succeeding so notably not because their curricula are heavy on "culturally appropriate" materials, but because they are raised in "culturally appropriate" home environments, where parents are absolute bears about the importance of education, schoolwork and discipline.
These values are universal, and rooted in the family. Sadly, Washington Democrats see a social engineering fix to every problem. One more reason that, over time, the few remaining "blue" counties in The Evergreen State will become more "red."
The House Education Committee hearing tomorrow also includes consideration of HB 1495, stipulating that any high school graduation-credit course on state history or government must cover "the American Indian peoples who were the first inhabitants of the state." The committee session begins at 8 a.m. Wednesday, Feb. 9, in House Hearing Room B, John L. O'Brien Building, Olympia.
Posted by Matt Rosenberg at February 08, 2005 02:28 PM | Email ThisHow...how...how can we make WEA and OPI and our legislators see that if we want to succeed we must REALLY raise our expectations...and give ALL of our children the tools they need to succeed? Our school is no more the place to teach cultural diversity than it is to teach sex education or any of the other drivel.
AND...I wouldn't want my kids learning about "role models" like Malcolm X or Cesar Chavez. If we're going to seek out role models, let's find them some real ones. Fortunately my children have the role models they need to succeed. They are called Mom and Dad and Granny and Gramma and PawPaw.
Thank God we home school!
Posted by: Doug on February 8, 2005 02:56 PMMatt Rosenberg wrote:
"The notion here is crystal clear. We need more coursework and learning goals and tests geared toward Kwaanza, the Hmong, Eritrean folk dance, Native American history, graffiti art, DJing, Malcom X and Cesar Chavez, in order for minority kids to be interested in school and succeed."
That isn't what it says.
I'm from the old days, although I do read my son's textbooks.
Back in my day, world history meant Western European history with a bit of Greek and Egyptian thrown in as "ancient" history. US history started at Plymouth Rock, and the Native Americans were considered "savages".
It's gotten much better, but there is still room for improvement. The idea that we should learn something of the civilizations of Asia, Africa, and the Native Americans along with Europe seems like a pretty good idea to me. I'll even go along with learning something about Eritrean folk dancing.
The world has gotten to be a pretty small place, and the more we understand of each other's customs and traditions, the better we will get along.
Of course, if you wish to argue that perhaps the single worst way of improving this situation is with a "joint select committee" of politicians, then we'll be singing the same tune.
"A committee is the only known form of life with six or more legs and no brain." - Robert Heinlein.
Posted by: John Barelli on February 8, 2005 03:22 PMHowever...let's teach them to read, write, spell (gawd I hate how spelling has just fallen out of fashion), and do math...and learn some basic science ... and get them up to grade level...and THEN do the other.
I'm not opposed to Eritrean folk dancing. But I'm opposed to investing my nickel in it when they don't have a clue where Eritrea might be on a map.
Posted by: SnoCo Voter on February 8, 2005 03:35 PMWhat we need is actual E-Q-U-A-L-I-T-Y.
I'm SICK AND TIRED of having race shoved around like a club to beat around those that have had adult encouragement enough to get through college.
Kids need parents or other adults to care about and encourage them, they don't need to be told "you have more melatonin so you're special and don't have to work as hard in school because we'll give you freebie points". What an insult to minorities. It’s like saying “we know you’re not as smart, so we’re helping you”. Makes me sick that the Dems do this to people.
What we need is to give people the chance to be equals and rise and fall on their own merits. We need to get through to kids and encourage education, and inform parents of the options. And for the parents that just don’t care, we need to loop back to getting through to the children in the classroom with effective teaching methods.
Take that money being used to pay the special committee and pay the teachers. Just do it-Talk is cheap.
I say we need to stop the Democrats from continuing this unfair social segregation!
English for everyone!!
American living for everyone!!!
Freedom!!!!
That isn't what it says.
That's right, Matt...you're supposed to report it in the original BS.
Posted by: South County on February 8, 2005 03:41 PMI think it is critical to teach Western Civilization and US History and Government first. Then we can get into all the other cultures. These have proven to be the most successful in the world, and provide for the greatest degree of freedom and prosperity. If that sounds bigoted, or small-minded, then so be it.
We need to understand the rest of the world, but we also need to understand ourselves. The purpose of public education is to make good citizens who can vote knowledgably and carry on the American tradition. We can't do that by being inclusionary and teaching other cultures along side of our own.
Posted by: Janet S on February 8, 2005 03:44 PMEritrean Folk Dancing might be fascinating and filled with meaning for those to whom it is relevant, and I assume that is mostly Eritreans. For a kid growing up in the US in the early 21st century, it's a waste of classroom time. If they are interested, they can pursue independant study on their own time. I don't want my child's limited classroom time which is provided at taxpayer expense being used to satisfy the whims of some politician looking to add "Promoter of Cultural Diversity" to his resume.
Posted by: Jason on February 8, 2005 03:44 PMI am making an assumption that in order to really get to know the way of these culturally diverse subgroups, the committee members must go to the cultural source in order to get a feel for what must be taught. Sounds like various junkets to Africa, Asia, Australia, South America, and Europe are on the horizon.
How do I spell boondoggle? “Joint Select Committee On Equitable Opportunity For All.”
I do live in Seattle and I do have kids in the public school system. One's in middle school and one's in elementary. I think the elementary schools have been fine. I'm getting a little concerned that the middle school is a bit "dumbed" down, but so far it's not that bad.
There's a lot wrong with the education system in this country and ridiculous proposals like the one Matt posted about are part of the problem. But trashing the public school system is not part of the solution. You can call me delusional or whatever you want, but the public school system in the US is one of the main reasons this country has been so successful. There are not many countries in the world that have universal access to k-12 education. It has always puzzled me why conservatives take such a delight in pummeling the public schools.
I think that the education kids get in public school is much like everything else: you get out of it what you put into it. Too many parents want the schools and the teachers to do it to their kids. That's not the way it works. Parents need to take an active role, either through helping with homework, helping in the classroom, whatever. If a kid comes home from school and plops down in front of the PlayStation or the TV and basically stays there until bedtime, that kid is going to learn much. It's hard for me to fault the school system if that kid can't read or do math at grade level.
Posted by: Steve on February 8, 2005 04:02 PMIsn't college the place for 'culturally competent education' and 'multicultural...learning objectives'? Isn't college the place where you can earn a degree, or at least take courses, in things like Native American Communication by Dance or Literature of the Kamchatka Peninsula?
Lucky for me, I came out of High School with the appropriate literature, science, math, history, foreign language, and computer science skills to succeed both in college and in the work force if necessary. It wasn't until I wanted to earn a B.A. degree that I had to take classes in Eastern Religions and other such superfluous multicultural subjects.
And weren't the 'first inhabitants of the state' those who crossed the Bering Strait land bridge during the ice age and passed through on their way to warmer and greener pastures? What could we possibly know about them that is relative to Washington State government and history?
Talk about a watered down education........
Posted by: Larry on February 8, 2005 04:03 PMHowever...let's teach them to read, write, spell (gawd I hate how spelling has just fallen out of fashion), and do math...and learn some basic science ... and get them up to grade level...and THEN do the other.
I've spent quite a bit of time as a classroom volunteer and, at least where I have personal knowledge, spelling is far from "out of fashion". In fact, my son has spent far more time than I remember spending on it. His classes are also at about the same math and science levels that I remember getting as a high school freshman. (He's in sixth grade.)
I'm unhappy about the fact that penmanship is becoming a lost art, but my handwriting is pretty lousy too, and, at 11, my son is as fast a typist as I am.
With a bit of creativity, the goals are not mutually exclusive. Teaching reading, for example, does not have to include Dick, Jane and that obnoxious little dog, Spot (who later went to work for Cal Worthington.) Some of my son's earliest books were of Korean folk tales.
Now, as to the absurdity of trying to legislate creativity...
Jason wrote:
I also remember when World History meant Western European History, and US History began with the pilgrims. I have no problem with that, for the simple reason that while what constitutes "History" is ever expanding, the amount of time available to teach it remains the same, or even shrinks.
History isn't expanding that fast, although the world seems to be shrinking pretty quickly. If we're going to be sending troops, or even money to help people all over the world, it might help just a bit to understand the people and cultures involved.
Now, if you want to argue that keeping our children out of school for three months every year is out of date, I'll agree with you. Anyone that still needs their children to help with the harvest is welcome to object.
Posted by: John Barelli on February 8, 2005 04:17 PMWould you mind posting this again?
Thanks,
These bills, especially 1659 are deplorable. Focusing on the excuses we can come up with as to why students can not perform at satisfactory levels is no way to encourage educational equality. We need to be focusing our educational objectives on the basics that students need to be able to enter the ever more competitive marketplace of the future. Yes, culturalism is important and I believe everyone should be encouraged to study his or hers as well as those of others, but not at the expense of subjects that are vital to gainful employment. Once we have brought our students up to par on things like reading, spelling and basic mathematics we can then focus on these other matters. And last time I checked, no matter how hard some may like to say otherwise, reading, spelling and especially math are not subjects that can be prone to cultural bias and if they can be then they are not being taught appropriately. Please do not vote these bills out of committe. While their intentions maybe honorable they are not an effective solution to correcting the problem of the learning gap and are, in fact, I believe, an insult to those minorities and others who are labeled as disadvantaged. I, for one, know many immigrants that work equally as hard if not harder than some of us that have lived here for generations and are able to put forth results congruant to those efforts.
Posted by: Mark Griswold on February 8, 2005 04:19 PMPeople will always reach the level at which they are expected to perform. If we expect our children to succeed and we help them along the way, they will be more likely to succeed. If we expect them to be second best, then they will reach that level as well.
Lowering the bar before giving them a chance will only let them reach the level of second best quicker.
The only decent non-western nation (note: I said nation not individuals) whose values have been adopted as superior is the Jewish nation.
Here is a slogan for government schools, we pick up (killing the children) where the abortionist leaves off.
Posted by: Jericho on February 8, 2005 04:31 PMThanks for bringing this to my attention. I am black and cannot stand liberals wasting time trying to address white guilt instead of getting the best science and math teachers in low income and minority neighborhoods with CLEAR STANDARDS and REAL "HIGH" EXPECTATIONS. When I have kids, be sure I will teach them about Kwanzaa. Its just for those 7 hours of the school day..TEACH MINORITY CHILDREN, ALL CHILDREN SKILLS NEEDED TO COMPETE IN ECONOMY OF TOMORROW: science and math. Leave the Making-a-child-a-better-person lessons to the family. Will call my rep NOW!
Malik
Posted by: Malik on February 8, 2005 04:32 PMThe district I am in is also constantly reviewing their curriculum. Whole language was a short-lived theory, unlike many districts. ESL is a 6-month program, and then the students are put in the regular classroom. Math is being reviewed as well. Theory is good, but so is computation, which was lost for awhile. Also, the district is thinking of making 4 years of math a requirement to graduate. This is all done because the parents demand it. There is plenty of grousing by those who think we are too hard on their little darlings, but the students manage to rise to the task, and thrive in this atmosphere.
It's unfortunate that parents in other districts don't demand as much, and don't get involved. Things don't happen by chance.
Posted by: Janet S on February 8, 2005 04:33 PMKids need to have better role models to choose from, and this is not taught by learning the River Dance of Swahili cultures. Rap stars and dope-smoking celebrities are not good role models, and teaching every culture on the planet will not change this.
Case for Evidence:
My stepson is totally not focused and does not care if he gets through high school. 2 years ago, him and his older sister had verbal competitions about who will make a better attorney: she's going to UW next year and he's going to drop out of school, get a cabin near a ski resort and be a skiier. He's going to smoke dope and work at the ski resort and get famous, just like Tanner Hall.
My stepson is 15.
He cannot go without his headphones and rap music, and always produces a set up no matter how many times we confiscate it. His favorite mix CD has songs on it like "Bi#$% Ain't Sh@#" and "Ma' Ho Gotta Piece".
Yeah. Teaching him cultures would make a difference.
Or maybe it's not allowing a culture to infiltrate your homes that would make the difference. (do we dare speak of this?)
I'm all for freedom of speach, but "Bi#%$ Ain't Sh@#" just does not qualify for the freedom act in my house. THAT is where the difference can be made.
Posted by: manderson on February 8, 2005 04:43 PMI'm confused. Are you blaming the school system for how your stepson is turning out?
Posted by: Steve on February 8, 2005 04:51 PMJohn B. - Wow, you are so right. Rather than have the children of Washington out of the hands of government for 10 weeks in the summer let's pass a law that reguires year round indoctrination (or rather dumb-mification.)
Recently during a Christmas season word oriented parlor game (Can I say that word Christmas in a 'public' forum?) one player, a product of government schools, could not even speak. No he was not dumb or retarded (19th Century definition of dumb and retarded). He was ignorant. After the party I remarked to my wife that if one ever wondered how the humans in the series of movies Planet of the Apes could have become dumb we just witnessed it. Government schools - killing you slowly.
Posted by: Jericho on February 8, 2005 04:52 PMI don't take any "delight in pummeling the public schools." However, it is my opinion that there is too much inculcation of rather dubious material in the public school system, coupled with a great lack of discipline. As has been mentioned there is only so much time available, and I would rather children learn the basics for their grade level, rather than being forced fed the leftist agenda known as "Diversity and Tolerance" (which isn't tolerant of conservative views) that seems to be taking place in more and more school districts.
How about a class in American Patriotism if there is so much time available?
The Washington State Public School System (not called the public education system for a reason) seems to be filled with teachers that are more concerned with indoctrinating children than teaching them. This has created an adversarial relationship between many parents and public school districts. That is why some parents home school their children, or choose private schools.
Some educators in this state seem to think that they should have more influence and authority over children than parents. I am sure that there are great teacher stories, but when my oldest son was 15, his "special education" teacher told him "you do not need to tell your parents everything that we talk about at school." How can I as a parent trust such a system?
Please just give our children disciple and the opportunity to learn traditional academic subjects at school, and let parents teach morals and values at home.
America didn't even have a public school system until New York City started them in the early 1900s as a means of providing education to the burgeoning emigrant population.
Historically, schools that were run and overseen by neighborhoods or communities produced students who were more proficient in math and communication. That was because these schools were held accountable, which was simply because the parents essentially ran the schools, and made it clear to every teacher that he/she was expected to produce quality students. They were not about to let some yahoo teach their kids about the history of erotic art. Any teacher who did not measure up was promptly sent packing.
We already have the legal right to homeschool our kids now. Does anybody here know if it would be illegal to simply create a "neighborhood school" along those same lines?
The WEA et al have their way because nobody is competing with them. I guarantee that the moment alternatives start popping up, they'll get scared spitless and back off.
Posted by: ERNurse on February 8, 2005 04:57 PM"If we're going to be sending troops, or even money to help people all over the world, it might help just a bit to understand the people and cultures involved."
I know you have been to some of the same 'hubs of civilization' that I have, and it is important to understand the history, if not culture of those 'bastions of freedom' in the Middle East.
As it was, I received an infinitely more realistic education from being there than any primer given prior to my arrival. I think public education in this field would be a similar failure compared to my prowess in high school Spanish after two years: If you don't exercise it, it gets lost. Perhaps, more simply stated "No blah-blah espanol." Maybe if I pursued it afterwards, but that leads to this inevitable conclusion:
I think college is more appropriate for this field of electives...
Whaaaa ... you say it's not a joke?!
Where do these kookie people come from and how do they get elected?
"Multi-cultural" ... the funny thing is that if you go to any of these countries that have a different culture, the last thing they care about is "multi-culturalism." They are worried about their families.
This entire politically correct belief system that dominates state government, which comes from a few bad seeds in Seattle, is just rolling along happy as can be, as if anybody still buys their nonsense.
Posted by: DeadManVoting (aka Iguana) on February 8, 2005 05:26 PMHi Steve – No, I’m actually treading diplomatic waters by admitting that his father and I were not on the same page with what types of things we should allow exposure to as parents, and what types of things we should turn a blind eye to. I don’t agree with allowing young impressionable kids to get overly involved in cultural activities or aspects of that culture if I find the culture to be potentially a very bad influence in the child’s development and how they will perceive the world as they grow into adults. But, he's his bio-dad and I'm just stepmom, so...
What I’m saying is that by letting my stepson get interested in a violent culture and not paying attention to what role models he was adopting, he’s gone down a path that will not lead to higher education.
The school system can’t do much about it. This is a home-front issue.
The problem is that many parents don’t care.
I don’t know what the answer for a true solution would be, but somehow I think that the burden falls on parents, who interact with these kids regularly and are their authority figures.
Pointing a finger at the schools would be scape-goating when this is something that could have been diverted on the home front.
But there are many parents out there who just don’t care what their kids do- regardless of race (been to Marysville lately?) For those kids, the only hope they have is what schools can get through to them. But I just don’t think that kids who have uncaring (on not understanding) parents at home are going to care about what other cultures do and I don’t think it will change anything for them.
This BS social fix is total BS.
For some of these kids, all they need are lessons in school that teach the kids pride in their work and for themselves is what's needed- no matter what the content being taught is.
Option B is to not care, but somehow that’s just not an option for a successful society.
good thought i'd love it if that actually happened, but I think they would levy for higher taxes before that happened. The alternative would be to pass more restrictions on home schooling, that is more likely.
Posted by: Adriel on February 8, 2005 05:42 PMWhat our baby girl desperately needs is training in the basic structures of standard English; that there might be other ways of saying " he ain't got no___".
There is something talismanic in the elevation of diversity in education circles; as though proximities of difference become magically beneficial in and of themselves. The Japanese insist on making a lot of noise when eating hot soup noodles. Is that the kind of diverse cultural trait you want you kid to adopt? If something is diverse or different from you is it automatically wonderful? Do we really want the state stepping in to tell us to be diverse - or else?
There's a soft underbelly of fraudulence to the whole diversity thing. Black and white Americans are basically the same except for a few stylistic differences. We both know this; let's get the state out of the "empowerment" biz.
Posted by: Doug on February 8, 2005 05:52 PMThis is a wacky attempt to force all of the teachers to take "diversity training" and bring in outside facilitators in to brow beat them with guilt trips about racial, gender, and (sexual orientation) issues.
Its the same thing as UW did in the 90s to make everyone take an ethinic studies course which is little more than propaganda, very little substance but lots of policy.
Teachers already do this to a degree, but it isn't enough. The PC crowd wants to implement an across the board "rainbow" type courses that sound nice but are confrontative, like a watered down V-monologue and often sexually explicit.
Posted by: Erik on February 8, 2005 05:55 PMI have to agree with smegma, I learned a lot more about a foreign culture when I was actually there wearing a flak jacket and holding a rifle than I ever would have in some cultural diversity class in High School. The immediacy of trying to understand the environment you are trying to survive in tends to focus one's attention.
I'm not advocating troop deployments as a means of learning geography and cultural awareness, I'm just saying that the fact that we do deploy troops all over the world is no justification for watering down limited classroom time with cultural diversity classes.
Posted by: Jason on February 8, 2005 05:58 PMYou said it better than I did... :-)
Posted by: smegma on February 8, 2005 06:01 PMSteve, I'm glad. I would very much like to exchange viewpoints on how I see public schools, if you are willingto do so.
Posted by: South County on February 8, 2005 06:07 PMBetween returning to racial preferences and nonsense like multicultural learning objectives, it is easy to see that the Democrats are in charge down in Olympia.
Posted by: iconoclast on February 8, 2005 06:13 PMMy 4 kids could be test cases in the difference between public and private.
BTW - we do love IA. Not everyone is cut out to homeschool their kids... :)
Posted by: Julie on February 8, 2005 06:17 PMThe righteous must ask themselves - are we willing to continue to accept the shackles upon us (and additional schackling) in trade for our SUVs, plasma t.v.s, church potlucks, pleasant Boyscout events, etc? How many more shacklings will we afford the oppressors?
There would appear to me to be only four solutions to the course of conflict in America. 1) The right surrenders and in enslaved.
2) revolution
3) The right begins the long walk back to retake the culture everything from literature, to Hollywood, to the bench, to ballparks, to Madison Ave, to academia, to the pulpit, to government, to the scientific lab, etc. (Obviously this is already happening to an extent, but is there time for it to be realized?)
4) The left is converted to righteousness.
Personally I think that option four is most likely with some of option three. It is also the mosts desirable option. Course of action for realization of option four (and three): Prayer and personal righteousness. Most notable areas so far of the left being converted: 1) Hollywood (not the big name stars yet), 2) the ballfields (the medias promotion of the bad boys of ball notwithstanding), 3) the science lab. Keep praying!! (There are now 100,000,000 evangelicals in America.) Personally I feel to make further progress the church needs to start acting different than the rest of the populace. Questions for Christians to ponder: What are you watching? To what do you listen? How do you treat your family? Are you a (family) peacemaker: Blessed are they indeed. Have you overcome your addictive sins? "When a man has washed he is clean except his feet." Are you clean. Righteousness by the church will have a cascading impact now. Worldliness will lose us ground faster than anything else, even lack of prayer.
Government education could take two paths.
1) Continue to become a cesspool at an accellerating rate.
2) Sowers being overtaken by reapers. In other words revival in the schools so fast that they are not recognizable as government schools.
We also chose the school district and have (largely) been pleased. In the high school even the kids see these efforts for what they are.
Posted by: BubbaDoRadar on February 8, 2005 07:00 PMI learned a lot more about a foreign culture when I was actually there wearing a flak jacket and holding a rifle than I ever would have in some cultural diversity class in High School. The immediacy of trying to understand the environment you are trying to survive in tends to focus one's attention.
My point is that if we learn something about the cultures, perhaps (just perhaps) we won't have to send people with rifles and flak jackets. Additionally, time with unfriendly strangers trying to shoot you hardly qualifies as a cultural diversity class.
We should not "water down" the math, reading and science curriculum. I'm a big fan of the WASL test, and I oppose efforts to make it easier. But, as those that have spent time volunteering in classrooms can tell you, we can find ways to do both.
Many of the private schools people on these boards are praising do so, while maintaining the highest academic standards. Why are we expecting less of our public schools? The public schools I'm familiar with already do many of these things, while being well into the top half of the WASL standings.
Now, if I wanted to be tarred and feathered, I could suggest that the additional academic courses take the place of team sports. But I won't, as tar is so hard to get out from between the toes.
Posted by: John Barelli on February 8, 2005 07:09 PMThat would be very hard to do in an environment where educators have been stripped of their right to maintain discipline in the classroom. Our oldest took one class at the local high school 1st semester last year. He said the teacher spent more than half of each class trying to get the class to calm down. The kids came in drunk and stoned. He never brought home any homework, he was able to do it all while there, despite the disruptions. You can guess the learning material wasn't terribly intense. BTW, I live in a fairly affluent suburb.
So now to fix the mess, they want to throw more money at diversification. WHO keeps electing these idiots?
Posted by: Julie on February 8, 2005 07:22 PMThe WASL is completely wrong! It's as though the test were devised by radical socialists. It cannot be used as a measurement of academic knowledge or ability. It's subjective! Go to the WA State Sup of Education website and take a look at the test examples..... There are no definitive *yes* or *no* answers. The questions on many of the subjects begin with..."How do you feel... about that equation"? or "Which colors come to mind... with that poem"? The tests are then sent out of state to be graded by minimum wage wokers in an area heavily populated by immigrants....
So you may have some purple haired kid or barely legal immigrant, earning 5 bucks an hour - deciding on your childs academic future - because the answers fall within a spectrum - they are not yes and no...(This is how the test was first graded when it was introduced - if it has changed..I'd like to know)...
My son has passed the WASL...but I don't consider it an achievement...just luck that he had someone grading it that gave him credit for answers that fell within the spectrum... The older standardized tests were a good gauge of ability.
My children could be classified as multiracial or hispanic or caucasion. I mark them as caucasion or nothing at all. I do not want them to think they were given a place in college simply because of their race. I do not want this perception made by others either.
They must know that they have earned what they achieve by their academic skills. Not - that they were chosen as a "token".
Posted by: Deborah on February 8, 2005 07:26 PMIn public, you couldn't say merry Christmas, but they would take the kids on field trips to study Hannukah. In second grade one of my kids' homework assignment was "draw a picture of a feeling". The first grader's class had 'alcohol-awareness education". And the kids in elementary level were swearing in the halls! Plus they acted like animals way too often, which always baffled my kids.
When we got to our current private school, I was struck by how substantive and well-behaved the kids were. My kids love it, and the education is oustanding. In fact, with the rigorous routine they've been put through, my 15-yr-old could already do college if she had the pre-reqs. And when my 7th grader (takes geometry this year! Blows ME outta the water!) finishes middle school, she will have the college routine down, just not all the pre-reqs yet.
I don't see much evidence that any public high school is doing that for kids, but I hope I'm wrong!
Posted by: Michele S on February 8, 2005 08:20 PMOops. Right rant but wrong angle. The right wingers like WASL, the "lefties" don't like it. See prior SP posts.
Adriel - The tyrannists of America (the left) will need to answer this question if the righteous choose to act in said manner of my last post or in a similar way. Are we (the left) willing to sacrifice our SUV's
Adriel: I understand your attack on the left (first sentence). Then you challenge the left and yourself to give up their SUVs.
Adriel, I wouldn't be so hard on your self. Being a lefty and owning a SUV are not the worst thing in the world.
Posted by: Erik on February 8, 2005 08:22 PMIt appears that Washington is becoming the next Oakland, CA. that wants to teach ebonics so they can reach the students. This is just another way that Democrats are proving they are in the pocket of the education lobby and have no clue the damage they are foisting on the country.
Until we teach americans about america, not xxxx-americans (insert african / latino / vietnamese / etc. ect.), just americans, there will be no appreciation of citizenship or equality. We must hold students and our communities to a single high standard and teach what matters: reading, writing, math and science. This insanity damages the very fabric of our society by legitamizing victimhood.
This proposal only helps maintain the status quo and does nothing about accountability from our educators, schools, or parents. The shame is that the people of Washington actually elected these people to represent them on these matters.
Posted by: Leon on February 8, 2005 08:23 PMMy point, both the left and the right are unwilling to sacrifice their lazy rich lifestyle to get what they want. What they want??? In the case of the left - control. In the case of the right - liberty. I suspect that the right having a greater understanding through relationship with Christ of what sacrifice is will move first to sacrifice comfort for freedom.
The left hopes to incrementalize the right into chains. It is a strategy that has worked well so far, but is reaching a breaking point - the right being tired of the continued and increasing shackels. The right's frustration with the government 'schools' are just an example of the end of the rope that is being reached.
Posted by: Jericho on February 8, 2005 09:44 PMA great school (public or private) is a school where all three parts work well together. The teachers care about the kids, the kids care about learning and the parents care about providing a healthy balance in their home and are actually interested in the education. That's why asian families are so involved in the education of their children, call it cultural, call it whatever you want. A parent who cares is a parent who will provide the best and will have a successful child.
There are some good public schools out there. WA legislature should take a look at those schools and the involvement of all 3 parts.
Posted by: FG on February 8, 2005 09:52 PM
It would be accurate to say that certain American Indian peoples were the first inhabitants of what later became the state. There were plenty of native-born U.S. citizens who could be considered "the first inhabitants of the state," which wasn't itself even established until the late 19th Century.
In my local district, Puyallup, I have studied nearly every adminstrator. In the entire Puyallup school district (20k plus kids) there is only one leader, a vice-principal who I can commend and I have even seen him cave on priciples to avoid taking fire from the leftists in the district. The system is dying and short of a full blown Christian revival there is no hope for it. Any sound parent, who is not lying to themselves (and lying to their kids) will immediately pull their kids out of government schools.
I used to teach in the system. I speak from experience. I have watched the system which was bad when I started in the early 1990's decline enormously since, both in academic standards and behavioral expectations, as well as suffer huge increases in PC nonsense as Rosenburg relates in his post.
If you have kids in the system get them out now.
Posted by: Jericho on February 8, 2005 10:14 PMA private school is nice, but not everyone can affort the 18K it costs for schools like Lakeside, Bear, Overlake, Seattle Prep, etc.
As for your excellant public school that your kids attend, I doubt it. Partial list of just some of the nonsense at every public school in America.
1) Scliosis check - what a time waster.
2) Block by block school bus pick-up followed by school programs on controlling weight problems.
3) Activity buses (detention buses) in the late afternoon so parents can stay at their job earning more tax dollars for the system.
4) Early dismissal so teachers can pull themselves together.
5) Behavioralist (Skinnerian) reading programs, example: Accelerating Reader (AR).
6) Co-education classrooms leading to a softening of literature.
7) The eradication of meaninful literature for 'racial' reasons.
8) Testing (such as the WASL) which itself attempts to influence the students political views.
9) National and State surveys that attempt to influence the students political views.
10) Growing use of sociologist and psychologists in one-on-one seasons with kids. This is increasingly happening without parental knowledge.
11) Growing use of assemblies - either nonsense assemblies that degrade students and staff or political assemblies that promote leftist politics.
12) Widespread growth of electives. End of meaninful core classes at the upper grades. Example of useless elective: Sports medicine.
13) Widespread growth of project work which has spread down to the elementary level. Project work is used to hide the illiteracy of the student body. The writing element in these projects are masked by the poster displays and oral presentations. The standards to pass these things are laughable and the actual grading of them is consistently dumbed down. If a teacher or staff member sits on a project committee and grades to a high standard he/she is not returned to that committee the next year.
14) The effort in every school to use title nine to destroy boys.
15) Silent reading - which is another way teachers are lazy. There is no standard, no grading, and no expectation, and no literary discussion - just sit down, shut up, and hold a book in your hand for 15 minutes - expanded to a half hour in many elementary schools.
I could list a hundred more items at least, but instead of spending Stefan's money I will instead recommend to you the book by Bruce Shortt, The Truth About Public Schools. Click my name for a sales link.
Posted by: Jericho on February 8, 2005 10:43 PM"Frankly, I am getting rather tired of it, especially if I am applying for a generalist position, based in the foundations of Western thought and culture. I can't quite see how teaching English composition requires special training in Latino poetry, or African dance."
But you aren't applying for a position teaching just English composition. You're applying for what you called a "generalist position" where you'll be expected to teach many subjects to students of varied backgrounds and traditions.
In fact, even if you're just teaching English composition, there are a number of Latino poets that either write in or have been translated into English. Will you ignore them? Are we in danger of losing Cervantes? Has Don Quixote finally been vanquished? Or is it just the Latinos that write in English (Montoya, etc...) that you object to? For that matter, how can you dismiss the poetry of a large segment of the American population? Remember that Montoya was an American poet. He lived in Fresno, California.
I'm picking on your statement about Latino poetry as it's the easiest target, but as a generalist, there are other areas as well. Will you teach of the geography of the world without speaking about it's cultures?
Nobody is asking for college level courses in cultural anthropology here. Frankly, I've been surprised at how little ordinary geography is taught. (In the case of one of my son's teachers, it was more than just a bit frightening to me to realize that she had a very shaky grasp of world geography herself.)
We can do far better without leaving the basics behind. The best schools (both public and private) are already doing it.
But to have a prospective teacher dismiss the entire idea so quickly shows me the very attitude that seems to be the problem. You're teaching reading. What is the problem with using a book of simple Chinese folk tales as a reading assignment? It's certainly more interesting for the students than Dick and Jane.
Posted by: John Barelli on February 8, 2005 10:49 PMThis is a question I found particularly strange: "Sara asked, "Where do you see the fraction 23/30 most often?" Can you answer Sara's question?"
The answer is a calendar. That is ridiculous.
Test kids, and schools - but not with this WASL. As for watering it down, it needs to be soaked in alcohol, lit and then start over.
Full title is: The Harsh Truth About Public Schools, by Bruce Shortt.
Click my monicur for a sales link.
Posted by: Jericho on February 8, 2005 10:54 PM
Thank you so much for your recommendation. But, I'm still not sure what your points are. You seem to believe I'm defending the public school system in general. But all I said was that yes, there are some good schools out there, but that they are not the norm or even common. Pls don't call me a liar. You might doubt what I have experienced in that one school, but it's the truth..I know what I've experienced over the past years. I've work hard to be part of this society and provide good education for my Children. I;ve also worked with the school to make sure I knew what was going on.
Here's a little charmer along these same lines.
http://www.thestate.com/mld/thestate/10718065.htm
All right, Rant off.
Remember before Dick and Jane came along we used the Reader. The height of its use was the end of the 19th century when literacy rates were at an all time high in America even given the huge influx of immigrants at that time. Also most only completed 8 years of schooling (no K and no 9-12) but yet literacy was 95%. A far cry from the 60% of today. Dewey and his demonic proteges saw to the replacement of the Reader - can't have something written by a Christian used in curriculum. Of course when one compares the Reader of the 1890's with the early editions you can see that the descent from the Biblical foundation had been going on for some time, yet still the best reading programs of today (Readwell probably tops the list) pale in comparison to the 1890's era Reader and the techniques then used.
Posted by: Jericho on February 8, 2005 11:05 PMKnow that I have seen the system from the inside, from multiple districts. I know how parents are kept in the dark about much of what goes on in the schools, even the parents that are involved.
All the best :-)!
Posted by: Jericho on February 8, 2005 11:09 PMSeattle Prep .. nope, we couldn't afford that. But we could afford local Catholic elementary schools AND high schools. Was it easy? Nope, we sacrificed vacations, clothes and a zillion other little things and gave of our TIME when asked. We drove (and still drive) long ways to get our kids to school and were willing to drive even farther. At one point we were on waiting lists from St Charles in Gig Harbor to Sacred Heart in Bellevue and we would have gladly endured the traffic for either.
How is it the Catholic school system can teach so much more effectively with such far less money than the government schools? It seems I heard that government schools were spending well over $5000/student/year to "educate" the kids. Our last elementary tuition ran us about $2500/year with all the little incidentals factored in. High School is currently costing us about $6500/year.
I'll answer my own question of why it is Catholic schools (and I'm sure other Christian and private schools) are so much more effective. They hold the children accountable to a standard - an educational standard, a behavioral standard and a dress standard. They hold the TEACHERS to the same standards. I can tell you, we didn't/don't see our teachers in class wearing blue jeans and t-shirts... they wore dresses and neckties. The teachers aren't afraid to discipline and certainly aren't afraid OF the students. And what is most interesting is that the Catholic school teachers aren't paid as well as those in the government schools - yet they are dedicated beyond belief. Again, at our last elementary school, our teachers were at about 88% of a public school teachers salary. For the most part, the buildings are older and they don't always get the latest and greatest technology gadgets but they LEARN to read, to comprehend, to achieve in math and science, to write coherent research papers and mostly to value the education they have received.
Also interesting, and I may be wrong on this now (today), but when the WASL was first being forced upon students the Catholic schools were told they would have to pay for it (as opposed to the government schools just getting it - I guess a separation thing). The diocese took a bit of umbrage at that hypocrisy (paying the state for a test the state was requiring) and refused. My youngest (now a Catholic HS Sophomore) has NEVER been given the WASL in Catholic school. They did however take other standardized tests.
Posted by: Cheryl on February 8, 2005 11:19 PMI suppose that I could go point by point, covering most (if not all) of them, but it's late, and I'm tired.
5) Behavioralist (Skinnerian) reading programs, example: Accelerating Reader (AR).
Have you looked through the available list of AR books? I was surprised (and very pleased) to note books by C.S. Lewis and Madeline L'Engle, among others. These books were readily available in my son's elementary (public) school library.
6) Co-education classrooms leading to a softening of literature.
Are you seriously suggesting that we should go to same-sex classrooms? And exactly what are you talking about with "softening of literature"?
7) The eradication of meaninful (sic) literature for 'racial' reasons.
Well, I admit that most of the books on the Council of Conservative Citizens (www.cofcc.org) reading list doesn't get in. White supremacist books are somewhat out of fashion. Still, Tom Sawyer is available in the elementary school libraries.
12) Widespread growth of electives. End of meaninful core classes at the upper grades. Example of useless elective: Sports medicine.
and
14) The effort in every school to use title nine to destroy boys.
Uh, ok. How does giving funding to the Girl's teams "destroy" boys? Of course, I'm still not entirely sure why we spend so much on sports in the first place.
Still, if we're going to consider football to be an appropriate way of spending school $$$, then a course in "sports medicine" seems like a good idea.
As to Mr. Shortt, wasn't his resolution stating that the Southern Baptist Convention "encourages all officers and members of the Southern Baptist Convention and the churches associated with it to remove their children from the government schools." overwhelmingly rejected by that organization? Of course, you know how those left-wing churches are.
It's late, and I'm too tired to continue. G'night, all.
Posted by: John Barelli on February 8, 2005 11:27 PMSorry Erik.....
The WASL was a lefty idea! Terry Bergeson will not let it go! 80% of the parents and teachers who first reviewed the WASL test - rejected it! They still reject it! It cannot be fixed - it should never have been purchased.
WASL predated Bush and was NOT part of his "No Child left Behind" Act. The WASL type tests have sprung up all over the US - during the Clinton years. They are in Canada too...(probably a French invention...)...
If there are some conservatives in this blog who favor the WASL - it can only be because they are misinformed.
Jericho - that is only the tip of the iceberg. Boys have consistently scored higher than girls on math, despite an emormous amount of resources devoted to teach girl match ... to over come the "cultural norms of the patriarch" which supposedly hold girls back in match.
So, since lifting girls wasn't working, they decided to beat back boys, deliberately try to make our boys less good at math.
There are several examples like that.
Also most only completed 8 years of schooling (no K and no 9-12) but yet literacy was 95%. A far cry from the 60% of today. Dewey and his demonic proteges saw to the replacement of the Reader
Where are you getting these numbers? My sources (United Nations Development Programme and the CIA World Factbook) show current US literacy at 97%. I've seen a number of sources give anecdotal evidence to the contrary, but none with any hard data.
As a Navy Counselor, I reviewed the records of enlisted personnel to find those with reading deficiencies. Anyone with reading scores that showed a level below the 10th grade was given additional classes. Out of a 2500+ man ship's company, I could not put a 20 person class together, although admittedly, anyone totally illiterate would not be able to join in the first place.
I've seen a few TV news stories over the years, but even they had little hard data and a lot of sensationalism. Many of these have been quoted over and over again. At least some of the "sources" for the data have denied even speaking to the reporters involved.
My own experience in the classroom as both a parent and a member of the Lions (we do one-on-one tutoring in reading) has also shown your data to be in error.
I'm not trying to say that the public schools have no problems. They are many and varied. Money is not the answer to most of them. Actually, I think that the answer to most of them is parental involvement. One of the advantages that private schools have is the ability to insist that parents participate. Too many parents use the schools as a "public babysitting service."
One of the tasks I've performed over the years was to prepare the "go home" folders with all of that week's completed assignments. The parents are told to expect this weekly, to sign the front of the folder and return it. Despite notes and phone calls to parents, we got back approximately half of them. This was in a comparatively affluent school district.
Get to know both your child's teacher and your local school board member. Volunteer in the classroom. If you're not sure how, ask at the front desk of the school or check with your local Lions Club, Kiwanis, Altrusa or other volunteer organization.
When you go to school board meetings, come with solutions that they can implement. (Asking your local school board to bring back the morning prayer or to use the book of Genesis as a science text isn't going to help. They can't do it even if they want to.) Be involved. Or, if you're unwilling to help, then quit complaining and get out of way.
Posted by: John Barelli on February 9, 2005 08:57 AMIt sounds like you are very involved in your children's education and I commend you for your hard tireless work. I wish more people would do the same.
I have to agree that immigrant parents tend to show more involvement, but that's an opinion not based in fact, only observation. That's the only way they can succeed in our public school system.
As long as the WEA and NEA act like a business (remember they make their money from dues, which always means they want more teachers), then we will have substandard education. The unions will alway advocate for more money to be thrown at the system, because it directly benefits the union.
Posted by: Ken on February 9, 2005 08:58 AMParental involvement, tuition-reduction offset by social contract commitments to the school, enabled families who would prohibited from attending a private school, a reality.
I'm not Catholic, but my husband is. We both are discouraged by the Washington State public school system. but believe we need to bring awareness of this problem so that it is a problem for all of us.
I've returned to college and am a student at the UW. Unless you are business or science student, be prepared for some very lame courses. In the young students I see the result of our public education system and the warped views or at best myopic views indoctrinated in these young people. I'm a minority (but who cares???) I want the very best education the UW can provide not a dumbed-down, anti-American agenda disguised in the form of multiculturism or that over-used word "diversity."
Posted by: Elaine on February 9, 2005 09:06 AMwhy are organized sports such a bad thing? Sports teach teamwork and discipline!
I never said they're a bad thing. I've spent a couple of years as a coach for youth soccer. I do think they are somewhat over-emphasized in many schools. A school that needs new textbooks but can afford new uniforms for the team has its priorities wrong. I should also note that many (not all) private schools have very little in the way of sports programs.
We've got people on this board complaining about the cost and time of a once-per-semester demonstration of various folk dancing in an auditorium (that is also used for many other purposes).
Somehow, complaining about that while approving of the football stadium at the local high school seems odd to me. I also see no complaints about pulling kids from classrooms for "team spirit days."
Additionally, as teamwork and discipline are considered the reason for the programs, complaining about the title IX rules that require girls' sports to be funded at the same level as boys' seems odd.
Posted by: John Barelli on February 9, 2005 09:24 AMWe end up with situations where the school is hard-pressed to come up with enough girls for a girls basketball team, while at the same time the boys wrestling team program gets cancelled, even though there are lots of boys ready to go. It kind of sucks if you are one of the boys, and you are a victim of politics that you don't even understand yet.
I guess it's better to just give the boys ritalin to calm them down, rather than letting them exercise (less trouble for everyone, huh?, yeah, mmmkay).
Of course, if there happens to be many more girls involved in a debating club or something else where their advanced (w.r.t. the boys') verbal skills are helpful, you won't hear a whole lot of talk about having "equal outcomes" there. No, no inconsistency here, just move along - nothing to see here ... ;-}
Mr. Jericho has many good points, and his statement on Title 9 is one of them.
Posted by: Jimmy Antley on February 9, 2005 10:34 AMJimmy Antley wrote:
"No, it's not odd at all, John. There are plenty of boys sports teams that get eliminated due to Title IX. The law is an "equal-outcome" BS type of deal where it prohibits unequal funding of the sports teams. The problem is, more boys than girls want to play *most* of the sports. Yes, I just said something politically incorrect (but true). Sue me if you can find me!"
Title IX reads as follows: "No person in the U.S. shall, on the basis of sex be excluded from participation in, or denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any educational program or activity receiving federal aid."
Nothing there about equal outcome.
It was put in place because girls wanted basketball teams, but all of the funding was used up for boys' sports. If your local school board claims that they're cutting funding for wrestling because they're required to have a girls' basketball team that cannot come up with enough students, then they're copping out. Feel free to copy the quote above and go to the school board meeting armed with it.
As to the debate team, it might interest you to know that many boys, yours truly included, did quite well in debate. This has served me well on these boards, being one of the few "lefties" willing to put up with the abuse.
Now, they may have to cut that wrestling team (or some other sport) if the girls want to have some team sports. A school with boys' football, baseball, basketball, swimming, tennis, golf, track and wrestling teams may have to cut something in order to have a girls team too. Too bad.
Posted by: John Barelli on February 9, 2005 01:06 PMFurther Title IX text:
"(b) Preferential or disparate treatment because of imbalance in participation [it goes on and on...]."
My read on the above is that you are correct, but bureaucrateze isn't my strong point.
And knock it off with the abuse reference. This is a 'no victims zone' :-)
Exactly my point, John. If the girls also have basketball, swimming, golf, track, but not wrestling, and the same amount of funds is put into the boys' as the girls', then the wrestling team gets cut due to Title 9. It's not quite the same as affirmative-action type discrimination, but it does assume that the same number of girls vs. boys want to play. That's not necessarily the case, and therefore common sense and the boys suffer.
As for the debating team, I would figure either the girls were better than you, or else your team must have sucked some ass.
Posted by: Jimmy Antley on February 9, 2005 05:54 PMDid you read the text of title IX before you wrote this?
Title IX does not require that the same amount of money be spent on girls' sports as on boys', regardless of the number of people involved.
It does require that a 20 person boys' basketball team and a 20 person girls' basketball team at the same school get roughly the same support.
If 300 boys want to go out for sports, and only 50 girls want to, then the school district should be spending approximately one sixth as much on the girls as on the boys. It may vary somewhat, based on the sports involved and the fact that some items are one-shot deals regardless of the number of children.
School districts often have to make hard choices as to where to spend money. There is a great temptation to blame someone else for the results of those decisions. Blaming title IX is much easier than saying "sorry, you're only going to get your share."
And no, I held my own pretty well and our debate team routinely won our district. The team was also pretty evenly male/female as I recall.
Gotta go now. Ash Wednesday services.
Posted by: John Barelli on February 9, 2005 06:38 PM"It does require that a 20 person boys' basketball team and a 20 person girls' basketball team at the same school get roughly the same support." That's definitely not the way it's used, and the text of it (as you pasted in above, doesn't say any specifices).
If it were as you say, I'd have no problem with it.
From the Ass. of Univ. Women web site:
************************************************
Title IX and Athletics
Title IX’s regulations require institutions to provide equitable athletic opportunities for all students, regardless of sex, in three separate areas: participation, treatment of athletes, and athletic scholarships.
To evaluate equality in participation, OCR considers three factors:
Whether male and female students are participating in athletics in numbers roughly proportional to their enrollment at the institution
Whether the institution has a history of expanding opportunities for the underrepresented sex
Whether an institution’s athletics offerings fully meet the interests and abilities of the underrepresented sex
If an institution meets any one of these tests, it complies with Title IX in the area of participation.
************************************************
Note especially the first point, John. That says it all. Another "equal outcome" fiasco that we have to live with, as least if we deal with the government schools.
Please read the plain language. Title IX’s regulations require institutions to provide equitable athletic opportunities for all students, regardless of sex
equitable athletic opportunities Everyone gets the same chance for a piece of the pie. Boys wrestling is no more and no less impotant than girls synchonized swimming. Or girls wrestling, for that matter.
Does this mean we need to provide a basketball team for six girls? Well, would we provide one for six boys? The answer to those two questions should be the same. That is what the plain language of title IX means.
It also says we should encourage girls to participate. Since the rationale behind school sports programs is to promote teamwork and character building, I've got no problem with that. If sports are just there for fun, then they don't need my tax dollars. If they're there for teaching, then the girls need them too, and should be encouraged to participate. Just like we encourage boys to take trigonometry.
Now I'll try to put this in easy language for you. If an institution meets any one of these tests, it complies with Title IX in the area of participation.
Not all, just one. In plain language:
1. If women participate in sports to the same percentage as the men, they're good.
or
2. If the school can show that they're making an effort to encourage women to participate, they're good, although it must be pointed out that this does not mean the just opening the football team to all six foot tall, 280 lb women.
or
3. If the women at the school are satisfied with the support they're getting, they're good.
Now, if the girls tennis squad (all 20 of them) cannot get transportation to their meet because the boys wrestling team (all six of them) used up the sports transportation budget, then there's a problem.
Or, if the school decides that it will support only tackle football, baseball and wrestling, but refuses to support any sports that women might prefer, then we also have a problem. (This was often the case before title IX.)
Sorry that you seem to think that the girls' sports program is somehow of less importance than the boys. Because that seems to be the gist of your argument.
The poor wrestling team can't get funding because all these girls want to have team sports too. Tough. Live with it. Or better yet, start a wrestling class down at the YMCA. While your arguments may sound good to you, they make the case for title IX.
Posted by: John Barelli on February 9, 2005 11:09 PMI can read John, and logically it makes a big difference whether you read that as an "or" or an "and". Additionally, like I already said, the Title 9 rules are used to shut down boys teams all the times in the interest of "fairness" .
"Sorry that you seem to think that the girls' sports program is somehow of less importance than the boys. Because that seems to be the gist of your argument." Man, you really can't comprehend a single damn paragraph, John. When there are kids who want to play, I see no reason to not have teams for girls and boys - many times there is not a lot of money involved. However, this law oftentimes has schools cancelling boys' teams with lots of participation so that they can open up a girls team whether anyone wants to play or not! It's the equal outcome crap.
It just seems like you have either not been aware of what's going on in the schools, or your reading comphrehension is atrocious.
You should per
You are correct about one thing. The difference between "and" and "or" is a huge difference. If all three of those items were required, then your point would be valid, and I'd be out charging the battlements with you.
I'm well aware of what is happening in my local schools. I'm on a first-name basis with the President of the school board and have volunteered as a reading tutor in the classroom. With my local Lions club, I have spent weekends assembling playground equipment at elementary schools. I'm of the firm belief that if you see a problem, complaining that "someone should fix that" is worse than nothing. In essence, I am that most dreaded of all animals, a liberal that is willing to get his hands dirty.
The fact that some school districts read more into the rules than they actually say is a problem. We concur on that. I'm also still of the impression that many school districts use the phrase "title IX" to deflect criticism for some of the decisions that they had to make. Let's face it, those folks have to face reelection. Unpopular decisions, even where necessary, lose votes. "Title IX made me do it" is easier to explain to voters.
My school days are from before title IX, so I've got something to compare against the current situation. Many schools lavished $$$ on the football team, gave some support to baseball and basketball, and if the girls wanted to participate, they could be cheerleaders.
Some school boards do get wierd about the rules. This is also how we end up with classrooms where the students are disciplined for saying "Merry Christmas" to a fellow student, and where menorahs and crescents are encouraged, but Christmas trees and Santa are forbidden.
It is not the fault of the rules, but those that cannot read and follow the simple language. I will happily join you in condemning that type of idiocy.
But the rule itself is not to blame. Ensuring that girls that want to participate in team sports have the opportunity is a very good idea. Even encouraging them to do so is a very good idea.
Putting together a complete basketball program for three girls is stupid, and it's not required by the rule. If your school board insists that it is, then it's time to get a new school board.
Putting together a sports program that appeals to both boys and girls requires administrators to rub a few brain cells together. Most of them can and do manage to do that. If yours can't, then that is a different problem altogether, and not the fault of title IX.
(I'll send instructions on bolding and italicizing off-line. It is a big help in emphasizing certain points.)