DADvocate

During a town hall meeting in Buffalo originally aired Dec. 7, 2006, Lou Dobbs and others discussed the role of schools in the success of Buffalo as a city. A audience member brought up the high number of students being labeled learning disables, the high drop out rate and other problems he saw with the school system.

James Williams, Superintendent of Buffalo Schools had this to say in reply,

"Well, one problem in this country, education is structurally flawed. Until we change the structure of public education, we're not going to make progress.

The school system is operating the same way today as they operated when I finished school in 1962. We start school at 8:00, we get out at 3:00. We have first period, second period, third period, etc. We didn't change the structure. We need a longer school day, longer school year."

Often the comparison we make when discussing school problems is between present day schools and schools of the 1950s and 60s and now. The performance of students from those eras is often used as the measuring stick for today. If this is a "structural" problem, why was the "structure" successful then and not now?

I graduated high school in 1969 and it seems to always be today's students are unfavorably compared to those of my generation. Maybe some structural changes are needed as society and kids have changed in the last 50 years, but, again, Mr. Williams "solution" is far from the best direction. We don't need more school; we need better school.

Mr. Williams response is a typical governmental bureaucrat response.

You need more of us.

But, you're the problem.

Precisely, that's why you need more of us.

Isn't this like "If the only tool you have is a hammer...?"

Yes. That's why you need more of us. We are the hammer.

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again but expecting a different result.

We don't need a longer school day and we don't need a longer school year. Kids would be so sick of school the drop out rate would rise and they would be less likely to pursue higher education.

We need more stimulating classes and better teaching techniques. We need more classroom involvement from parents, business people, and other community members. Most learning occurs outside of school. Having a longer school year and longer school days would interfere with the outside of school learning, which may be more important and more effective than much of the in-school learning.

I remember reading an article in a parenting magazine when my now 18 year old son was an infant. The article pointed out that toddlers that followed their parents around and communicated with their parents during ordinary day-to-day activities performed better on measure of earlier childhood intelligence that toddlers whose parents used more formal learning methods such as flash cards of animals, etc.

As students enters higher educational levels, they spend less time in the classroom, graduate students less than undergraduates, undergraduates less than high school students, and high school/middle school students less than elementary students. Obviously, more classroom time and longer days are not necessary for higher learning to take place. The performance of home schooled students, who may have little or no traditional classroom time, points to the same conclusion. Classroom time is not critical.

In my own experience, I've explained and taught my kids many math and science concepts in 5 or 10 minutes that, apparently, the teacher couldn't adequately teach in an hour. Perhaps, much of the problem facing schools is what goes on outside of school, not inside.

With the tremendous growth in single parent families, fewer parents have adequate time to help with homework and school projects. Also, with only one parent, parental resources are halved. The father may be able to help with subject areas in which the mother is not fluent and vice versa. But I doubt that both parents are easily accessible in most single parent families thus depriving children of half of their parental resources. Here is an article on the importance of father's involvement in education.

School choice also provides potential to create improvements in schools. Competition drives athletes and businesses to new heights of performance every day, why not schools. Mostly because school systems are scared to death of having to perform well enough to attract and keep students. Private schools only provide a competitive alternative where they are available and to those who can afford them.

My oldest son attends a Catholic high school which claims to be the cheapest Catholic high school in the country. I do know that it is 50% to 70% cheaper than the Catholic high schools in Cincinnati. It is still more expensive than what an in-state college student pays at the University of Tennessee.

The obvious answer here is vouchers. This exchange displays the public school attitude towards school choice

QUESTION: Yes. Actually, what I'm going to ask, given what you've heard tonight is going to seem crazy, but in the coming weeks, they are going to announce in Buffalo that a number of schools are closing with excellent test scores because of the enrollment. They're private Catholic schools. What can we do to...

DOBBS: Why are they closing?

QUESTION: Because enrollment is low and too few people can afford that education. What can we do in the community to get past this special interest so that the money follows the kids to the education choice that's best for them?

DOBBS: Superintendent Williams?

WILLIAMS: Did he say Catholic schools?

DOBBS: He did.

WILLIAMS: Oh, well, we're developing better public schools, so I like the competition. When I came here we had 15 charter schools -- and I believe in competing. And to compete, you have to have rigorous curriculum. You have to hold people accountable and you have to have quality teachers, and we're working on those things.

But we are competing to -- this year, we have got 1,200 additional ...

DOBBS: I'm not hearing a lot of sympathy from the superintendent about those Catholic schools.

It's one -- you know, I happen to be a great fan -- the great thing about America is choice, but I happen to be a fan of public education. It changed my life. I come from a working class family. I would never -- I can tell you six public school teachers turned my entire life in a different direction. That's something I think we ought to have for every kid.

For those who can benefit from a parochial education, private schools, God bless, but let's invest in our public schools, because that is our future.

Mr. Williams says, "I like the competition." and "the great thing about America is choice,..." But he tiptoes around the voucher issue like a ballerina. I'm sure he loves choice and competition as long as that choice is no threat to him and his bureaucracy. Like virtually every other public educator, he is scared to death of vouchers. Once parents have real choices, you can bet the farm on what will happen and Mr. Williams and most other public school superintendents won't be too happy.

But school choice has much opposition. Some oppose supposed government support of religion, most private schools are religious. Some believe, as commenter Mercurior said the other day, "the government doesnt want people to think for themselves, that they want them to obey the state.." For the most part, I have to agree. But, mostly, public school systems and their teachers are scared to death of going out of business. They know they deliver an inferior product and don't want to be further exposed.

I'll have some proposals on what schools can do soon. One thing we can be sure of is that effective solutions to school problems are not likely to come from within the established educational minds such as Mr. Williams. They are the same people who go us here in the first place.