Posted in School

I try to keep my eyes on the school choice situation in Florida, as it could impact homeschoolers in the future.  Gov. Jeb Bush, has made large waves with his voucher program.  More than 30,000 disabled students have been offered options for education.  80,000 students have benefitted from the approximately 200 Charter schools under Bush.  When Bush took office, educational reform was a top priority.  He believed that creating competition for funding would promote schools who were constantly striving to be better for students. 

All statistics aside, I read this article, that outlined what has been done, and chuckled at the obvious babyish kicking and screaming remakrs from opponents.  For example, ''This is a scheme he created for Florida to undermine the public school system,'' said Andy Ford, president of the Florida Education Association, a group of teachers unions."  The chosen words, scheme and undermine, almost made me chuckle.  Mr. Ford, your personal offense really shone here.  Do the teachers in the unions truly believe that offering competition for funding is a scheme that is undermining public schools?  None of the ones I have talked with. 

Another whine, ''We made it too easy in Florida to get a charter, but what it did provide was a choice for parents, an alternative,'' Arza said. ``The quality of education might not be supremely better, but it might be an environment that they're pleased with.''   The terms "too easy", "not be supremely better", and "environment that they're pleased with" indicates that choice has nothing to do with qulaity of education.  While I do not have any expertise or facts to back whether or not charter schools provide a better education, in this line of thinking, if parents are looking for a better environment, which inspires their children to want to go to school, doesn't that account for something.  Perhaps something so basic isn't worthy of true consideration.

Yet another derrogatory remark regarding giving parents the right to choose their child's education: ''The objective was the paint the teachers union into a corner and make them look bad,'' said Warford, now the executive director of the Florida Association of School Administrators."  The impication that the sole purpose and goal of the effort was to make teachers look bad, is completely insane.  Couldn't it be as simple as giving parent's choices to have a say in their children's education?  Why do the spoke's people for teacher's unions feel the need to make it seem as though it's all a coup against them, instead of the true focus...THE CHILDREN!

"But Bush's relentless push for vouchers and charters also permanently poisoned his relationship with with some teachers unions and local school systems, which saw the movement as an attack."  An attack?  Strained relationships?  Aren't we all on the same side.  Isn't the goal to offer the best education for all students?  If so, then why would any teacher or union feel undermined by efforts to offer choices instead of attendance mandates which would require students to attend schools that are inferior and not impacting students?  If they are doing a fabulous job and the schools are offering such qulaity education, then parents will choose their school, so their shouldn't be any real "threat". 

On the flip side, this comment: