HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
X-Mailer: PENELM [version 2.3.1 PL11]
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.edpolyan
Date:         Tue, 26 Jan 1993 21:44:32 EST
              <EDPOLYAN@ASUACAD.BITNET>
From:         Anne Pemberton <apembert@VDOE386.VAK12ED.EDU>
Subject:      Re: school choice and clinton
              93 11:58 am

Peter Lau wrote:

> John:  You must have been sleeping when you took Logic in
> college.

.........  (paragraphs deleted) ............

> By the way, while I don't know too much about DC schools,
> I don't think that every DC public school is overrun with

Peter, If this is an example of your brand of logic, it's
apparently over-rated. I think I'll continue to build my
opinions from facts.

Useful logic requires us to look at facts not swill in
symbolism.  Clinton was governor of Arkansas for some years
before Chelsea started school. By the time she enrolled,
he'd had the opportunity to boost the quality of Little
Rock public schools. His campaign remarks reflected his
pride in that accomplishment. While he was looking after
the schools his daughter would go to, Reagan and Bush
back in DC doing nothing but kicking the DC and other
public schools around in the press to justify squandering
the funds needed for education on S&L's, Contras, and
other military and political boondoggles.

If there is any symbolism to be found in Clinton's
concurrance with Chelsea's choice, it is that he too,
recognizes the gross inequities and inequalities that exist
among public schools. If he avoids the silly band-aid
efforts of vouchers, and he buckles down to the serious
business of improving education, hopefully, when he leaves
this office, he will be as proud of the public schools in
DC as he is of those in Little Rock. It's going to take
more than a trickle, or a thousand points of symbolism
to pull it off!!





--
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
*                                                                   *
*    Anne L. Pemberton              apembert@ncps.vak12ed.edu       *
*    Nottoway High School           apembert@vdoe386.vak12ed.edu    *
*    Nottoway VA                    notthigh@ruby.vcu.edu           *
*                                                                   *
*           *       *       *       *       *       *               *
*                                                                   *
*   "One of the most spectacular privileges of intellectuals is     *
*    that they are free to demonstrate scandalous stupidity with-   *
*    out ever jeopardizing their reputations"   ---   Eric Hoffer   *
*                                                                   *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.edpolyan
Date:         Tue, 26 Jan 1993 07:55:11 -0500
              <EDPOLYAN@ASUACAD.BITNET>
From:         JFCOVALE@SUVM.BITNET
Subject:      school choice and clinton

For a long time I was confused by the charge that the Clintons' choice of
Sidwell Friends was evidence of the hypocrisy of Slick Willie.  The last batch
of postings have, perhaps, clarified the issue for me.  The Clintons
advocate policies that support public schools, but do not send their own
children there.  On this view consistency lies in either advocating policies
to undermine the public schools (e.g., public money to private schools) or
actually avail themselves of the public system.  The hypocrisy lies in
exercising a privilege they have by virtue of wealth and position while at
the same time attempting to ameliorate the conditions that make that
privilege so powerful.  I assume that the comparison is being made to the
previous administrations, in which rich and powerful men were admirably
un-hypocritical in their frank and open advocacy of policies that would benefit
rich and powerful men.

On this reasoning, if Bill Clinton chooses to advocate policies to improve
the lot of the homeless, I assume that he will again be charged with hypocrisy
unless the family spends the rest of his term living in a cardboard box outside
Union Station.




****************************************************************
*                                                              *
*                    John F. Covaleskie                        *
*      Cultural Foundations of Education and Curriculum        *
*  259 Huntington Hall                                         *
*  Syracuse University                 Maloff Towers, #2       *
*  Syracuse, NY  13244                 Chittenango, NY  13037  *
*  315/443-3343                        315/687-5595            *
*                   JFCOVALE@SUVM.BITNET                       *
*                                                              *
****************************************************************
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: edpolyan@asuacad.bitnet
X-VMS-To: IN%"edpolyan@asuacad.bitnet"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.edpolyan
Date:         Tue, 26 Jan 1993 14:37:36 -0400
              <EDPOLYAN@ASUACAD.BITNET>
From:         JSYNTS@RITVAX.BITNET
Subject:      What is school for?

Why don't we start with reverence for all living things and the world that
supports them. Begin our curriculum on this theme. Wonder what would happen
?
Jonona Young
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.edpolyan
Date:         Fri, 22 Jan 1993 15:05:38 -0500
              <EDPOLYAN@ASUACAD.BITNET>
From:         U56E3@WVNVM.BITNET
Subject:      Re: Clinton's school choice

Re:  John Wong and aims

Just so... and what disturbs me now and for a long time is that we no longer
discuss the aims of education.  My own view is that education ought to help
us become better human beings.  Your next question, John, will doubtless be:
"What's that?"  Might it be caring better for ourselves, each other, those
who come after us, and those who came before most fundamentally?  Being better
--wiser, really--citizens could be included.  A true education might also
nurture some passion for this mission.  Mr. Grandgrind doesn't care much for
this mission, but he cares a lot for "economic competitiveness."  Such a
mission strikes me as the human calling, and I'm distressed to wonder (godless
being that I be) if such a calling isn't actually more fully in evidence
(pace, Frank D.) in many more churches than schools.  But wait:  I'm not
arguing for spiritual education (or catechism).  Intellect, memory, and
imagination to inform a passion for this calling--that would strike me as
education.  Schools are often (more often, at any rate, than is healthy)
deadening places, lethal to the mind; they cultivate forgetfulness and dis-
regard.

You ask, should all schools be like THIS?  Certainly--one could learn carpentry
and spreadsheet management as well as poetry and music under such a regimen.
Schools could be as different as you like, so long as they were grounded in
(dare one say?) such devotions.

Democracy, I understand, was a form of government practiced a long while ago
by an affluent slave-holding assortment of small towns.  Not only do we have
the dilemma of private v public, but the dilemma of sacred v profane.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11t]
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.edpolyan
Date:         Fri, 22 Jan 1993 16:20:43 MST
              <EDPOLYAN@ASUACAD.BITNET>
From:         Roger Wilson <rwilson@ACS.UCALGARY.CA>
Subject:      Re: Parents, School, and Government
              93 12:23 pm

Michael G. Hines writes:

>Bill Clinton's selection of school is correct.  Parents are
>responsible for their children's education and government is
>responsible to be service providers.

There are a number of problems with this argument. First, Bill
Clinton is an example of an average parent responsible for his
child's education. WRONG. Bill Clinton was a candidate for and
eventually became President and effectively employed his
daughter's schooling as a propaganda tool. To fall back on the
former after using the latter to attack his opposition and its
perceived elitist tendencies doesn't wash. Bill wants it both
ways, but since it is early in his presidency and this is a minor
issue relative to the economic agenda before him, it gets a
limited play, but persistence with such flip-flopping will
eventually take its political toll (Zoe Baird being a case in
point - you can't talk about cleaning up gov't and new conflict
of interest rules and offer up a lawyer as a candidate for the
nation's top cop who knowingly broke the law and need not have).


>A sub-point being
>argued is that government is mearly a service provider and they must
>learn to compete on a real basis with other service providers on
>a business level.


The problem here is that there are two different agendas at work.
One is providing a non-profit service with the emphasis on
non-profit (focussing on service) while private service providers
ignore the bottom line at their peril and is essentially the
reason they are in business, NOT for some ultruistic social
calling. That is not to suggest that gov't service providers
cannot improve their delivery, but unlike private service
providers, when the public cries out for EXPANDED service, they
rarely can refuse. The increasing demands on government for
expanded services is something that the private sector can CHOOSE
to ignore, concentrating instead on a particular niche, hence
gov't's increasing bureaucracy and general unwieldiness.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
X-Vmsmail-To: SMTP%"EDPOLYAN@asuvm.inre.asu.edu"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.edpolyan
Date:         Thu, 28 Jan 1993 09:48:29 -0600
              <EDPOLYAN@ASUACAD.BITNET>
From:         FSMITH@CHARLIE.USD.EDU
Subject:      RE: Omaha 2000 Session To Beam Across U.S.

Re: Omahoa 2000.  Is Omahoa REALLY doing new, innovative programs developed spec
ifically for the America 2000 goals?  Or did they really plug into the formula e
xisting programs and services, thus continuing to do what they were already doin
g?  Are these programs any more effective then what they were doping prior to Om
aha 2000?  What evidence do they have to demonstrate the difference?
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Priority:     normal
X-Mailer:     Pegasus Mail v2.3 (R4).
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.edpolyan
Date:         Tue, 26 Jan 1993 15:21:02 EST
              <EDPOLYAN@ASUACAD.BITNET>
From:         "Michael S. Hines" <MSHINES@FREH-03MS.ADPC.PURDUE.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Survey regarding campus smoking policies

Purdue U restricts smoking to designated areas.  This is very restricted,
but some areas are still inside buildings.  Personally I like Clarkson's
approach...the butts go outside to smoke their butts (my paraphrase
....kindly keep all your flames for your smoking freinds <grin>).

This fall we restricted smoking in the football stadium (an outside
facility) to in the walkways..and not in the stands.  This cut down
considerably on secondary smoke.

The basketball arena is smoke free...all smoking is outside.


Another question, as a non smoker it bothers me that "outside" means just
outside the door...and you have to walk through a blue haze to get in or
out of the building.  Does this bother anyone else, or is this a personal
hang up?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Internet:  mshines@ia.purdue.edu      |  Michael S. Hines
Bitnet:  michaelh@purccvm             |  Internal Auditor-EDP
Purdue WIZARD Mail: MSHINES           |  Purdue University
GTE Net: (317) 494-5845               |  1065 Freehafer Hall
                                      |  West Lafayette, IN 47907-1065
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.edpolyan
Date:         Tue, 26 Jan 1993 16:13:11 MST
              <EDPOLYAN@ASUACAD.BITNET>
From:         bob stout <AORXS@ASUACAD.BITNET>
Subject:      America 2000

Given recent Educ. appointments, NOW what should Clinton do about
AMERICA 2000?

Robert T. Stout     Arizona State University.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.edpolyan
Date:         Sun, 24 Jan 1993 14:46:39 -0500
              <EDPOLYAN@ASUACAD.BITNET>
From:         RSN@NIHCU.BITNET
Subject: Re: The reality of the Clinton school choice.

In addition to agreeing with everything Anne Pemberton said
about the Clintons' school choice, I do want to offer a bit of
additional background--thanks to the incessant coverage in the
Washington Post of everything Clinton-esque.  It is clear from
numerous stories about both Bill and Hillary that their own
school experiences were powerful influences on their later lives--
they both still have friends they made dating back from elementary
school, high school, college (he at Georgetown and she at Wellesley),
his year at Oxford, and finally at Yale Law School.  The people
they met and their other experiences surely must incline them to
want schooling to be an equally rich experience for their own
daughter, whether or not her father happens to be President.  To
quote an earlier pol of similar Democratic species--"Why not the
best?"
Bob Stonehill
Director ERIC Program
U.S. Dept. of Education

P.S.--Trust me--during the past 12 years here at ED there has been
PLENTY of whining about the costs of private school.  Though much
of the rationale behind vouchers was to open up choices to lower-
class parents (as if $1000 would enable them to send their child
to an exclusive private school, and as if there was room in them
anyway), there was also a clear statement that the middle class and
even upper class would benefit from these government-funded programs
as well.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.edpolyan
Date:         Sun, 24 Jan 1993 07:27:15 -0500
              <EDPOLYAN@ASUACAD.BITNET>
From:         JFCOVALE@SUVM.BITNET
Subject:      The reality of the Clinton school choice.

John G.  While I agree with just about all you say, I think there is a sense in
which it misses the point of those who criticize the Clintons' choice.  Their
argument seems precisely based in the theoretical problems involved in
reconciling the unique and special position, power, and privilege the Clintons
have in a nation founded on notions of democracy and equality.  These notions
seem to have become conflated to the point where "democracy" seems to preclude
"privilege", and the claim seems to be that the President should be no differ-
ent from any other citizen in any respect.

Those who think that Clinton should have either (1) sent Chelsea to public
schools or (2) changed his policy to support private school vouchers: does the
above seem right to you?

On another point: I have not heard anyoine dissent from the proposition put
forth by Gene that public control of private schools would follow any signific-
any significant infusion of public money.  What then would be the long-term
unanticipated consequences of this policy, if this is a correcet assumption?



****************************************************************
*                                                              *
*                    John F. Covaleskie                        *
*      Cultural Foundations of Education and Curriculum        *
*  259 Huntington Hall                                         *
*  Syracuse University                 Maloff Towers, #2       *
*  Syracuse, NY  13244                 Chittenango, NY  13037  *
*  315/443-3343                        315/687-5595            *
*                   JFCOVALE@SUVM.BITNET                       *
*                                                              *
****************************************************************
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-VMS-To: IN%"EDPOLYAN@ASUACAD.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.edpolyan
Date:         Tue, 26 Jan 1993 17:03:00 CDT
              <EDPOLYAN@ASUACAD.BITNET>
From:         "John O. Wong" <JOHNWONG@MACC.WISC.EDU>
Subject:      Re: school choice and clinton

Covaleskie,

No question in my mind you are logical, esp. when it comes to the clear
separation of personal from public goods, and which comes first in your mind.
Nevertheless, let's give it one more try:

>The hypocrisy lies in exercising a privilege they have by virtue
>of wealth and position while at the same time attempting to ameliorate
>the conditions that make that privilege so powerful.

Not at all!  The hypocrisy lies in claiming empathy and support for public
education BEFORE winning the election by pointing to Chelsea's attending public
school, but enrolls Chelsea in private school AFTER the election had been won.
There is NO suggestion of public policy leanings here, which Clinton may well
do a decent job in substantive terms.  The "disappointment" is, as I said
earlier, is the "little white lie" and the unfortunate message it sends to the
inner city folks.

>I assume that the comparison is being made to the
>previous administrations, in which rich and powerful men were admirably
>un-hypocritical in their frank and open advocacy of policies that would
>benefit rich and powerful men.

As far as I can see, there was never such a comparison.  I suspect this is an
exercise you have been performing in your own mind.  The comparison in what
could have been a great opportunity for Clinton to do even better, and short of
that, at least a bit more forthright about inner city education for one's own
children, and by extension, those of other fellow Americans.

We lament because we care.  The only way we can get better is if we want to be
better.  Nothing precludes Clinton from doing great things in education for
this country.  As a matter of fact, action speaks better than words, and this
is precisely what people look for over the long haul.



                                    # John Wong (608)263-3025
                                    # johnwong@wiscmacc.bitnet
                                    # johnwong@macc.wisc.edu
From: 72460.3000@COMPUSERVE.COM (peter lau)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.edpolyan
Subject: RE: Trivia question
Date: 21 Jan 93 17:00:15 GMT
              <EDPOLYAN@ASUACAD.BITNET>
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.

You guys are just too quick!  Bill Clinton's father died before he was born,
in a traffic accident on his way to see his wife and soon to be born son.
Bill's mother remarried, and Bill took his step father's last name at age
15.  But I don't know if he is the III or the IV.

peter
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.edpolyan
Date:         Tue, 26 Jan 1993 15:38:53 -0500
              <EDPOLYAN@ASUACAD.BITNET>
From:         TJPUGH@SUVM.BITNET
Subject:      kunin

Skip Brand asked:
>What does anyone know about Madeleine M. Kunin (the governor from Vermont)?

>Are there any Vermont educators out there?

Skip,
I lived and taught in Vermont about 4 years ago.  Madeleine
Kunin was governor at the time.  Perhaps someone else can
provide specifics, I'm short on them; but I can give some
impressions.  She had a liberal's belief in supporting
social programs and public education.  During her tenure
teacher's fought for, and in many cases won, significant
salary increases.  Students who were formerly placed
out of district for special education were brought back
into the schools and the classrooms under a program
called "Homecoming."  The portfolio assessment project
now getting some national attention was begun.  The
real estate and tourism boom had also just gone bust,
so localities were left with high real estate valuations
and high taxes to support the schools, but with a decreasing
ability to meet those payments.
  I do not know what involvement if any she had with
any of these things.  And I do not know how the local
tax burden problem was handled.  My sense is that
she relies on a professional culture of experts more
so than many Vermonters would like.  They're used to
doing things locally through citizen groups.  They
seem to have a fairly stubborn attahcment to participatory
democracy.  But she is probably less attached to a
technocratic culture than someone like Dukakis.
  Personally, I'm pleased to know she's a member
of this administration, in whatever capacity. I've
heard her speak a few times and was impressed.  As
for her specific actions at education, I'll have
to wait and see.
  Good luck garnering information about the ed.
governors.  It's a worthwhile project.
--tom m-p
* * * * * * * * * * * *
Tom Mauhs-Pugh
Cultural Foundations of Education

259 Huntington Hall         TJPUGH@SUVM.BITNET
Syracuse University       TJPUGH@SUVM.ACS.SYR.EDU
Syracuse, New York
             13244        (315) 443-3343
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Priority:     normal
X-Mailer:     Pegasus Mail v2.3 (R4).
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.edpolyan
Date:         Fri, 22 Jan 1993 15:36:40 EST
              <EDPOLYAN@ASUACAD.BITNET>
From:         "Michael S. Hines" <MSHINES@FREH-03MS.ADPC.PURDUE.EDU>
Subject:      Character Education

          WILLD%BYUVAX.BITNET@asu.edu says....

>It seems to me that we as educators are constantly exposing students to
>"character education" through the values we hold and live out in our
>relationships with students.  For example, to the extent that we assume we
>are responsible for their learning instead of reminding them that they are
>responsible, we are sharing a value that encourages students to attribute
>responsibility to others.  Values are implied even if they are never
>discussed openly by our lives.  So how can we make "rationale" statements
>about what values we will and will not teach as part of the curriculum?
>Each teacher is teaching a variety of values through interactions with each
>student at every moment of the day!

And more than just teachers...everyone we come into contact with.  I think
thats called "life".


----------------------------------------------------------------------
Internet:  mshines@ia.purdue.edu      |  Michael S. Hines
Bitnet:  michaelh@purccvm             |  Internal Auditor-EDP
Purdue WIZARD Mail: MSHINES           |  Purdue University
GTE Net: (317) 494-5845               |  1065 Freehafer Hall
                                      |  West Lafayette, IN 47907-1065
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Subject: (no subject given)
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.edpolyan
Date:         Mon, 25 Jan 1993 11:39:35 -0600
              <EDPOLYAN@ASUACAD.BITNET>
From:         ALANO@HOUVMSCC.VNET.IBM.COM

I don't think anybody here believes that Clinton should send his
daughter to public schools in D.C.  I wouldn't want my boys there, and
I'm sure you wouldn't either.  I think what bothers people is the fact
that Clinton likely knew this all along.  While preaching against the "unfair"
benefits of the "rich" and the need to "reform" public education, he
probably never had any intention of sending his precious to the D.C.
school system.  He said what he said to get elected.  If he had said what he
really intended to do, like "My wife and I make over 100 grand a year
and we'll probably send our daughter to a private school while in D.C",
then that possibly would have hurt his chances, at least with the NEA.

If this is truly the reason people object to Clinton's choice, then it
is more of a personal frustration than anything else -- they are
offended by the way he gets away with riding both sides of the issue.

Now, once we put this issue away, I think we will just have to wait and
see (as has been argued here before) what happens.


Alan Ogletree
Houston, TX
you sympathize with Clinton or now,
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU