03.14.08

HD-52, Education Matters

Posted in Commentary, Election 2008, HD-52, Public Schools, Williamson County at 12:05 pm by wcnews

Going through some of the “wing-nut” email I receive I came across one that mentioned the Texas High School Completion and Success Initiative Council. What is the Texas High School Completion and Success Initiative Council (THSCSIC) you ask?

House Bill 2237 passed by the 80th Texas Legislature establishes a High School Completion and Success Initiative Council (Council) to identify strategic priorities for and make recommendations to improve the effectiveness, coordination, and alignment of high school completion and success and workforce readiness efforts. The council is composed of the Commissioner of Education, the Commissioner of Higher Education, and seven members appointed by the Commissioner of Education from a list of nominations provided by the Governor, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, and the Lieutenant Governor.

There you have it. It’s a council created by this past legislature to come up with a plan to keep high school students from dropping out, and prepare them either for the job market or college. Sounds admirable. But like anytime you get 9 Republican appointees in a room to talk about education the V-word has to come up. As this Waco Tribune editorial points out, A school voucher sneak attack:

Unfortunately, this week when the High School Completion and Success Initiative Council met, a body appointed by voucher proponents Gov. Rick Perry, House Speaker Tom Craddick and Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst, some members tried to turn their advisory role into a mission to bring about vouchers for “drop-out prevention.”

Fortunately, State Rep. Rob Eissler, chairman of the House Public Education Committee, made an impromptu appearance to tell the advisory group that vouchers were not germane to the committee’s mission under the language of the bill that created it. The council backed off.

Without question, the council has an important mission: Advise on how public schools can better prepare students for higher education and to see how standards of both can intertwine.

It is clear that teaching focused strictly on passing state standardized tests doesn’t do the trick. College-bound students need to shoot higher or vast numbers will need remedial classes, as too many do today. And these days every student needs continuing education to thrive in the changing marketplace.

As with the whole of public education policy, there’s enough to examine and improve without sidetracking discussion to the tendentious and dubious idea of siphoning dollars from public schools to private ones with vouchers.

Stick to the agenda, please, and leave Mr. Leininger’s agenda out of it.

Yes, yes, please stay focused on the task at hand and stop trying to sneak in the GOP money man’s agenda. And this FWST editorial, It looks like a duck, offers a few suggestions to the THSCSIC:

A couple of caution flags for TEA as it writes these regulations:

McAdams’ description of the council’s plan might rule out parochial schools. In a 2002 decision on a voucher program in Cleveland, the U.S. Supreme Court said that public money can go to religious schools without violating the Constitution’s mandatory separation between church and state — but only if it gets there through the private choice of individuals. If it doesn’t go to parents first, that’s a problem. If it does go to parents first, that’s a voucher.

Dropouts who enter one of these programs and get a diploma should be required to meet the same standards as students in the public schools. For instance, they must pass the same state exams. If not, the state would simply be creating a secondary, substandard pathway to graduation — one that would encourage more students to drop out and take the easy path.

The goal of keeping more kids in school and bringing more dropouts back to school to get a diploma is a laudable and necessary one. Designing ways to do that clearly is not easy. Still, there are right ways and wrong ways to go about it.

A voucher plan would be one of the wrong ways.

We anxiously await TEA’s specifics of how the council’s plans will be carried out.

Using a laudable and necessary goal, as a vehicle to sneak in the pet project of their wealthy donors, is exactly the way the GOP operates. That’s where HD-52 comes in.

In November voters in HD-52 will have a choice between a candidate who, not only supports public education, but has a proven track record of making public education better, that candidate is Diana Maldonado, or a candidate that’s a member of the pro-voucher GOP. Along with electing Maldonado will, more than likely, come a change in the House leadership. If she’s elected it’s also likely change in the Texas House to a Democratic majority. Which means these types of council’s will have Democratic representation and these “sneaky” tactics will be history. Be assured that not matter which GOP candidate gets selected to run against Maldonado they will be on board with Craddick, Perry, and Dewhurst, and their plans for vouchers and defunding public education. With education being the major issue that it is makes Maldonado the clear choice in HD-52.

Permalink