Re: Foxnews: Local Public School System Challenges Homeschoolers

[Karen Canty <kvscanty@pacbell.net>]

Art,

Sorry it took so long but has been a busy month and I needed to think
about a response to you...

Yes, we have to comply with state law and give tests; however, we don't
have to comply with the "all teachers being qualified in X years, the
security provisions, i.e., reporting on expulsions, etc, or, if we were
a hs district -giving all juniors and seniors names (or sending opt out
forms to parents) to the military" and other requirements of NCLB that
California does NOT require for our accountability system.  

However, the board had the discussion and were convinced by the staff
that it made sense to take the money because neither the superintendent
nor the curriculum director felt the requirements would be burdensome.
At least they had the conversation and will be asking questions about
the cost in the future.

Ah, well, can't win them all - 

Karen

-----Original Message-----
From: Assessment Reform Network Mailing List
[mailto:ARN-L@LISTS.CUA.EDU] On Behalf Of Art Burke
Sent: Friday, December 13, 2002 9:39 AM
To: ARN-L@LISTS.CUA.EDU
Subject: Re: Foxnews: Local Public School System Challenges
Homeschoolers

I suppose you could turn down the federal funds.  But you would still
have to participate in the state assessment.  I assume it's required by
your state law.

By the way, how big is your district and how many kids are on subsidized
lunch?

Art

>>> kvscanty@PACBELL.NET 12/13/02 09:23AM >>>
Actually, the board took up that issue last night (I've retired); I
don't know where the discussion went but since there are two MBA's on
the board, I'm sure it was at least an interesting discussion.  I'll
find out and be happy to let you know.  Now part of the issue in my
district is that we qualify for such a little amount of money - about
$31,000 - that it might be easier for us to turn it down except that one
could probably scale it up at some level to see how much it will cost
the state in total...

Do I really think that the states will actually do something like this?
No...but I keep hoping.  In fact, when I mentioned it at the State
School Board conference last week, the staff folks I talked to readily
agreed that we should do some sort of cost/benefit analysis but are not
recommending it because even if it turns out to cost the state more than
we get back, it would be too hard politically to "turn down" money.  So
that's where we are...waiting for GW to term out (assuming he gets
elected again) and hope that this all goes away.  Maybe we've all seen
too many education presidents/governors etc. come and go to really feel
like we have to take heat for anything that involves turning down money.
And maybe the politicians know that and so just keep doing it to us....

Thoughts for an early morning...

Karen

-----Original Message-----
From: Assessment Reform Network Mailing List
[mailto:ARN-L@LISTS.CUA.EDU] On Behalf Of Art Burke
Sent: Friday, December 13, 2002 8:06 AM
To: ARN-L@LISTS.CUA.EDU 
Subject: Re: Foxnews: Local Public School System Challenges
Homeschoolers

Oh, yes, I understand the concept of "cost."

I have lost track of who are where you are, but do an experiment:  Tell
your local district that they can save money by opting out of NCLB and
see what happens.  I'd be interested to know.

Art

>>> kvscanty@PACBELL.NET 12/12/02 05:17PM >>>
Art,

And I meant the "we" as in the entire state because even if parents opt
out districts who take the money have to bear the cost of sending out
the opt out letter, getting it back, figuring out who opted out and who
didn't, etc. etc.  See what I mean about the cost?

karen

-----Original Message-----
From: Assessment Reform Network Mailing List
[mailto:ARN-L@LISTS.CUA.EDU] On Behalf Of Art Burke
Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2002 12:58 PM
To: ARN-L@LISTS.CUA.EDU 
Subject: Re: Foxnews: Local Public School System Challenges
Homeschoolers

If "we" means parents, then yes, "we" can opt out as you say.  But take
the case of California opting out of NCLB.  Where would that leave the
districts that want the resources?  Now where's the "we?"

Art

>>> kvscanty@PACBELL.NET 12/12/02 12:34PM >>>
No, Art, but we could opt out of sending our juniors and seniors names
and addresses to the military; we could opt out of trying to decide if
we have a "persistently dangerous school". Ca. has a testing program
that looks like it might not work under NCLB so if the whole state said
NO, we could use our state tests - and then local communities might be
able to put enough pressure on our LOCAL state legislators to
change/modify/add alternative assessments, etc. which we would be hard
pressed to do at the federal level...

Or am I still completely wrong?

Karen

-----Original Message-----
From: Assessment Reform Network Mailing List
[mailto:ARN-L@LISTS.CUA.EDU] On Behalf Of Art Burke
Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2002 10:02 AM
To: ARN-L@LISTS.CUA.EDU 
Subject: Re: Foxnews: Local Public School System Challenges
Homeschoolers

The public schools are not the exclusive product of a "local community."
They are a curious entanglement of local, state, and federal
communities.  Just saying "no" is not that easy.  Assume, for example,
that a district refused Title I funds.  That does not mean that it could
opt out of the state assessment, or the obligations and consequences
that come with that.

Art

>>> kvscanty@PACBELL.NET 12/12/02 09:46AM >>>
Art,

What does state secession have to do with saying "no" to federal funds -
if local communities decide that it will cost more to comply with the
rules than the money received?  I don't think the Civil War answered
that question or if it did, I missed it..

karen

-----Original Message-----
From: Assessment Reform Network Mailing List
[mailto:ARN-L@LISTS.CUA.EDU] On Behalf Of Art Burke
Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2002 8:40 AM
To: ARN-L@LISTS.CUA.EDU 
Subject: Re: Foxnews: Local Public School System Challenges
Homeschoolers

Unfortunately for your thesis, the principle of "secession" was rejected
in our polity some time ago, although its whimpers are still with us, as
the business with Trent Lott reminds us.

Art

>>> ecrump@INTERVERSITY.ORG 12/12/02 05:43AM >>>
On Mon, 9 Dec 2002, Art Burke wrote:

> Eric ... What choice do you think "schools" have in refusing "state"
and
> "federal" funds?  And what other ways are there for funding public
> schools?  I'm curious as to what you think is going on here.

There's nothing mysterious about what I think is going on, Art. It's a
common principle in our culture: Whoever pays gets a say. As long as
money
includes obligation, it's important to pay attention to the intentions
of
funding sources. In other words, if you're going to accept money from
someone or some organization, make sure you know what they expect from
you
in return.

I've quit two jobs in recent years, one a good one with good pay and
good
benefits and good people, when it became clear to me that the
organization
I worked for had different ideas and directions in mind than I did. I
took
huge pay cuts, but I did that gladly because the move was right. I was
liberated from having to comply with directives I didn't agree with, and
the organizations were liberated from having to contend with my
resistance. Worked out best for us all.

I'm suggesting that if schools (meaning the local teachers, students,
parents, administrators, and board members) do not like the requirements
of receiving federal and state money (such as testing the beejezus out
of
the kids), they could just say no. They could rethink what they do and
how. They could rethink what they need and how to finance their work.
They
could get creative and develop new ways to get education accomplished.

Schools, like many individuals, commonly think they have no choices when
actually what they have are difficult choices. They have options that
would require tolerance for uncertainty and a good deal of creativity
and
innovation. As long as they feel yoked to the state teat, they won't
work together to solve the problem of how to educate the young. They
will
keep on doing to their kids whatever Big Bureaucracy tells them to.

They aren't trapped by Big Bureaucracy and its Big (but growing less)
Money. They are trapped only by their own assumption that they are
trapped.  Escape is possible. They have only to escape.

--Eric Crump

------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
To unsubscribe from the ARN-L list, send command SIGNOFF ARN-L
to LISTSERV@LISTS.CUA.EDU.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
To unsubscribe from the ARN-L list, send command SIGNOFF ARN-L
to LISTSERV@LISTS.CUA.EDU.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
To unsubscribe from the ARN-L list, send command SIGNOFF ARN-L
to LISTSERV@LISTS.CUA.EDU.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
To unsubscribe from the ARN-L list, send command SIGNOFF ARN-L
to LISTSERV@LISTS.CUA.EDU.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
To unsubscribe from the ARN-L list, send command SIGNOFF ARN-L
to LISTSERV@LISTS.CUA.EDU.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
To unsubscribe from the ARN-L list, send command SIGNOFF ARN-L
to LISTSERV@LISTS.CUA.EDU.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
To unsubscribe from the ARN-L list, send command SIGNOFF ARN-Ll
to LISTSERV@LISTS.CUA.EDU.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
To unsubscribe from the ARN-L list, send command SIGNOFF ARN-L
to LISTSERV@LISTS.CUA.EDU.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
To unsubscribe from the ARN-L list, send command SIGNOFF ARN-L
to LISTSERV@LISTS.CUA.EDU.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
To unsubscribe from the ARN-L list, send command SIGNOFF ARN-L
to LISTSERV@LISTS.CUA.EDU.