Re: San Diego UT on Prop 82

[Rich Gibson <rgibson@pipeline.com>]

Thanks for your thoughtful reply Nancy.

I am trying to figure out where we differ, on what point we part ways on 
this issue.

It seems to me that we disagree at the outset, and then we diverge in 
several different ways.

I don't think our votes, yours and mine, matter much, hardly at all. I do 
not think voting changes things. I may be wrong, but it appears to me that 
you do---as do many people in the US.

I especially do not think choosing one politician over another changes 
anything significant at all, indeed it only reinforces tyranny. I don't 
throw away my vote when I write in SUSAN HARMON, who is vastly superior to 
anyone on any ticket I know about; I am hoping someone will notice my 
raised finger and, if not, I know I raised it.

In this case, on the proposition, I think voting may make a very small 
difference because it could create conditions that allow people to fight 
back against capitalism and its bad schools, wars, lousy health care 
system, economic inequities, racism, etc, in somewhat more advantageous ways.

If more people have more kids in schools, they will be somewhat more 
organized. Some people will  have day care they would not otherwise have, 
and may be able to raise a little more hell because of that, and some kids 
might get fed in school when they do not get fed at home, etc. All of that 
has to be evaluated in its specificity, just as I think it is largely wise 
for kids to quit school as soon as they can, and get on to college, but 
that cannot apply to all kids, so I would say that preschool both sets up 
better conditions to fight for change, and it probably will do some people 
a bit of good. In other words, in this case, a vote for prop 82 just sets 
the table for further action. I do not see it as a progressive act in itself.

I do not think voting on this one way or another will do anything to stave 
off what some people believe is a plan to privatize public education. 
Voting down prop 82 will do nothing about that. (I don't think key powerful 
people in the US want that plan adopted, anyway. Why should they? They are 
getting most of what they want from a segregated school system that is paid 
for, mostly, by the taxes of working people. There are third tier elites, 
like Whittle, who might want to see privatization happen, but Whittle is 
not Rockefeller, is hardly powerful in comparison).

If we both agree that the system of public education is broken ( I prefer 
the term "rotten" because it is serving the needs of elites pretty well) , 
then will you agree that there is nothing wrong with attacking it as I do, 
saying it should be shut down in the midst of civil strife, and overcome 
with some forms of Freedom Schooling? If not, then what do you propose?

Professors over programs and policies in the CSU college of education 
systems(no different from their k12 colleagues; motivated by opportunism, 
racism, ignorance, and fear) are already aligning their syllabi with k12 
standards and high stakes tests. I would guess that much of that will be 
achieved in this decade, in the absence of campus strife, and the 
regimentation of CSU life will spill quickly into the Liberal Studies 
programs, with the full cooperation of the professors in those programs, 
eager to get FTE's, utterly unwitting that they will be giving up what 
little of academic freedom they have now.

Students who do liberal studies degrees in the CSU system now get what was, 
perhaps fifteen years ago, a mediocre community college education. They 
know little or nothing of history, cannot locate themselves in relation to 
others in the general scheme of things, and they know it. I find that the 
attack from the right on colleges of education has a little merit. People 
are so focused on methods, they forget that there are no methods without 
substance. Students are taught math methods without knowing math. They 
learn Vygotsky and never hear the Marx behind him. Same with social 
studies, for sure. So, the preservice students are relatively eager for 
directions, regimentation, when they hit the classroom, and are unprepared 
to resist, because they have never witnessed resistance---surely not from 
the overwhelming majority of their profs.

Thus, I would agree that there is not much lost in the absence of a 
credential these days. It is mostly a sign of perseverance and 
subservience. Much of what preservice students learn is either flatly 
wrong, or nonsense.

Regimentation is already in place in k12, with the full cooperation of the 
teacher union leadership---indeed they inspired much of it---and it is, as 
you say, only getting worse. It is true that the regulations could easily 
spill into preschool classes, an almost nightmarish scenario. If that 
happens, and I agree there is a good chance it will, then our task will be 
to fight it, to resist.

If prop 82 passes, I think we will be resisting on only somewhat better 
terrain. However, as is my habit, I will offer my vote for sale to the 
highest bidder in the November election, my contribution to free enterprise

best r






At 09:37 PM 6/5/2006 -0700, you wrote:

> College students can use government financial aid at the school of their 
> choice.
>
>
>
> This Proposition 82 will allow pre-school children to use government 
> financial aid at the school of their parentschoice.
>
>
>
> How, then, could the in-between years argue against vouchers for K-12 
> students?
>
>
>
> I dont see how adding another level of education to an already broken 
> system is a good idea.
>
>
>
> Any public school will have its curriculum and standards and materials 
> dictated by the state/federal government.  Whether that is benign or evil 
> depends on who is in power and what your point of view about education is.
>
>
>
> I dont like the idea of making pre-school teachers have to have 
> credentials.  Needing knowledge about child development is important, but 
> pre-school shouldnt be academic.
>
>
>
> Places like the National Council on Teacher Equality are already 
> assaulting colleges of education about their syllabi for teaching 
> reading.  I dont want them digging into pre-schools to that extent.
>
>
>
> The DIBELS people already have a pre-school DIBELS testhow many pictures a 
> child can name in a minute is one of the 3 or 4 tests.  Given the ubiquity 
> of DIBELS in elementary schools, it WILL happen in pre-schools and kids 
> will be labeled at risk before anyone even sees what their interests are, 
> or their aptitudes in other areas.
>
>
>
> Just because rotten things are happening in many public schools, I dont 
> see adding that problem to pre-schools as being very helpful.
>
>
>
> In addition, I dont think there is enough money to fund EVERY pre-schooler 
> in the state, and many parents who already pay for private school will 
> suck up some of that money from kids whose parents havent been able to 
> afford pre-school, and still wont get it because the money will run out.
>
>
>
> Just look at whats happened with the NCLB tutoring and school choice.
>
>
>
> Voting No tomorrow on Proposition 82.
>
>
>
> Nancy
>
>
>
> ~Life may not be the party we hoped for,but while we are here we might as 
> well dance~
>
> ----------
> From: ca-resisters-owner@interversity.org 
> [mailto:ca-resisters-owner@interversity.org] On Behalf Of Rich Gibson
> Sent: Monday, June 05, 2006 9:15 PM
> To: ca-resisters@interversity.org
> Subject: Re: [ca-resisters] San Diego UT on Prop 82
>
>
>
> George has it right.
>
> I actually did it today. I voted. Disgusting. I hope it does not encourage 
> the riff raff.
>
> But I voted yes on prop 82 and tried to explain why in that second posting 
> that George Sheridan mentions.. .If anyone wants that, I will send it 
> again, but I won't clog mailboxes with it by sending it now.
>
> I have to say that I do not understand the opposition to  proposition 82 
> that comes from the Whole Language movement (and I may be misreading the 
> trends there, but such is how it appears to me---WL is opposed to prop 82).
>
> As far as I can tell , the Whole Language opposition believes that 
> preschool kids will be trapped in bad schools and regimented by the 
> curricula of the Empire and high-stakes testing. That could, of course, be 
> true.
>
> In addition, some people opposing prop 82 seem to be saying that it will 
> lead to, or assist in, the end of public schooling. I do not follow that 
> logic at all.
>
> Bad regimented schooling is already true of the entire K12 world and it is 
> often the same people who are saying we must "defend public education" who 
> say we should defeat prop 82 (there is no such thing as a single public 
> education system in the US, but maybe six or seven utterly segregated and 
> inequitable school systems---ranging from pre prison to pre law depending 
> mostly on race and parental income of the kids in the school--- where 
> teachers for the most part teach lies--nationalism, etc--- to kids using 
> methods that are so incoherent that children not only are unable to 
> unravel the lies, they learn to not like to learn).
>
> It is commonplace for teachers in the not-public segregated US school 
> system to pay far more real attention to test scores and grammar than they 
> do to the equity clauses that are written all over US history and its 
> paper constitution.
>
> But I still hear passionate calls to "Defend Public Schooling," from 
> people who I respect while at the same time they organize vs prop 82.
>
> I honestly do not understand that.
>
> If it is true that prop 82 might/will lock preschool kids, the babies, 
> into rotten schools, then just how is it that this mere logical extension 
> of rotten schooling into the whole k12 world needs defending? What MIGHT 
> be bad about the preschools is ALREADY bad about k12.
>
> It seems to me that Defending Public Schools and Opposing Prop 82 is 
> contradictory. Perhaps someone can explain why it is not.
>
> In any case, I voted yes. And, I tried to make it clear in my earlier 
> posting that I am especially aware that I maybe wrong. That feeling comes 
> from the great respect that I have for people who I am told are voting NO, 
> but they can give me no good reason why they are doing it. I am more than 
> willing, eager to hear the other side of this.
>
>  I wrote in Susan Harmon for all the other existing offices. I especially 
> like Susan for Judge.
>
> Below is a quote about government as a weapon of the rich. I no longer 
> feel that I need to prove this approach to be true. To the contrary, with 
> all the evidence at hand, I think it is up to those who believe this is 
> not true to prove it. And, if this broad analysis of capitalist government 
> is true, then surely it is true of capital's schools, not OUR schools, but 
> capital's, THEIRS.
>
>
>     The state (government) is nothing but an instrument of oppression of 
> one class by another__no less so in a democratic republic than in a monarchy.
>         Friedrich Engels, preface to Kark Marx, The Civil War in France, 1891
>         German socialist & economist (1820 _ 1895)
>
> best r
>
>
> At 04:33 PM 6/5/2006 -0700, you wrote:
>
> Children who attend quality preschool read earlier, learn faster and 
> succeed at a far higher rate than those who don't get the opportunity. 
> Proposition 82 would provide free, voluntary, quality preschool to all 
> 4-year-olds in California. (Today, only 20 percent of the states 
> 4-year-olds have this opportunity.) Those who oppose this measure for 
> various reasons are just making excuses because they don't like the fact 
> that Proposition 82 is written so that the very wealthy will be made to 
> foot the bill.
>
> The San Diego Union Tribune is even less likely than the Wall Street 
> Journal to give good advice on economic or social policy. I'm not sure 
> even Rich Gibson meant for us to be swayed by the paper's editorial 
> position. Two minutes after posting the message to which you replied, he 
> sent a message saying "I'm going to vote for this thing ...
> because I don't think it is useful to take what is largely a principle 
> (opposition to the capitalist state and its schools) related to most of 
> reality, and to force it down onto all of reality, when things are 
> sometimes more complex. I am going to vote for this thing because of some 
> complexities. ... I think if this thing passes, it creates better terrain 
> for social change."
>
>
>
>
> At 06:38 PM 6/5/2006 -0700, Jo Behm wrote:
>
> Agree Prop 82 should go down.
>
>
>
>
> From: Rich Gibson <rgibson@pipeline.com>
> Reply-To: <ca-resisters@interversity.org>
> Date: Sun, 04 Jun 2006 15:33:25 -0700
> To: <ca-resisters@interversity.org>
> Subject: [ca-resisters] San Diego UT on Prop 82
>
>
> Prop 82: No, no, no
>
> Initiative is badly crafted, deceptively sold
>
>
> George Sheridan
> Northside School
> Cool, California 95614