Site search
sponsored by
Home
News
This column deserves to be entitled "Bookends." Why? Because I couldn't resist the temptation to comment on two recent articles on education by Jim Clark and Steve McKibben and the diverse opinions suggested by their commentary.
Jim in his article "Bureaucratic ensnarements don't change" chastises, to be kind, the county and the village for what he believes to be administrative ineptitude in the public schools thus producing two elementary schools neither of which is cost effective. Now I don't know about the validity of Jim's representations that this ineptitude will "cost taxpayers $5 million in WASTED MONEY" but it would sure be nice to hear from county and village school administrators if he's misrepresented the situation. Otherwise I am left to shake my head in anger at yet another example of bureaucratic bumbling and a titanic waste of the public's money. But wait. Jim really has more to say than just that, as if that alone weren't enough. He's also damning, at least by inference, the whole public school enterprise in referencing his own decision to get involved in a particular Reno charter school and the decision of Steve McKibben to limit his teaching to private schools to avoid those nasty Bureaucratic ensnarements.
The subsequent article by Steve McKibben, "Children will continue to be left behind" makes an entirely different point. Steve attended a lecture by the venerated teacher and writer Jonathan Kozol when he took a recent course at Columbia University.
For those of you who want a synopsis of public education in America, and a good cry at the same time, I suggest you get over to the library or our local bookstore and pick out any of Kozol's books. Steve alludes to Savage Inequalities and The Shame of a nation but really any of the work of this prolific writer and extraordinary person will do. For Kozol's devastating message is both simple and elegant: Almost all children can learn and achieve if appropriate resources are provided. Kozol should know. Before embarking on his perilous and painful journey to chronicle the near unimaginable conditions in poor inner city schools he spent several year teaching in them. As McKibben correctly asserts "Kazol's indictment of the state of American education is brutal." Not to put too fine a point on it, but Kozol is really talking about the educational resources provided to our underclass.
So what do these two bookends seem to suggest in the every day world? Jim Clark likes No Child Left Behind and is clearly a fan of charter schools. Steve McKibben asserts that No Child left Behind aggravates our societal dynamic of providing more educational resources for the well off and fewer for the poor.
Sounds like all this has the making of an exciting town debate. I'd even be willing to moderate, but I suspect many of you would have a hard time believing I could be "fair and balanced."
Jim in his article "Bureaucratic ensnarements don't change" chastises, to be kind, the county and the village for what he believes to be administrative ineptitude in the public schools thus producing two elementary schools neither of which is cost effective. Now I don't know about the validity of Jim's representations that this ineptitude will "cost taxpayers $5 million in WASTED MONEY" but it would sure be nice to hear from county and village school administrators if he's misrepresented the situation. Otherwise I am left to shake my head in anger at yet another example of bureaucratic bumbling and a titanic waste of the public's money. But wait. Jim really has more to say than just that, as if that alone weren't enough. He's also damning, at least by inference, the whole public school enterprise in referencing his own decision to get involved in a particular Reno charter school and the decision of Steve McKibben to limit his teaching to private schools to avoid those nasty Bureaucratic ensnarements.
The subsequent article by Steve McKibben, "Children will continue to be left behind" makes an entirely different point. Steve attended a lecture by the venerated teacher and writer Jonathan Kozol when he took a recent course at Columbia University.
For those of you who want a synopsis of public education in America, and a good cry at the same time, I suggest you get over to the library or our local bookstore and pick out any of Kozol's books. Steve alludes to Savage Inequalities and The Shame of a nation but really any of the work of this prolific writer and extraordinary person will do. For Kozol's devastating message is both simple and elegant: Almost all children can learn and achieve if appropriate resources are provided. Kozol should know. Before embarking on his perilous and painful journey to chronicle the near unimaginable conditions in poor inner city schools he spent several year teaching in them. As McKibben correctly asserts "Kazol's indictment of the state of American education is brutal." Not to put too fine a point on it, but Kozol is really talking about the educational resources provided to our underclass.
So what do these two bookends seem to suggest in the every day world? Jim Clark likes No Child Left Behind and is clearly a fan of charter schools. Steve McKibben asserts that No Child left Behind aggravates our societal dynamic of providing more educational resources for the well off and fewer for the poor.
Sounds like all this has the making of an exciting town debate. I'd even be willing to moderate, but I suspect many of you would have a hard time believing I could be "fair and balanced."
