From: lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich)
Subject: Re: US Public Schools: Get Rid of All the Bureaucrats!
Organization: LLNL
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 16:21:22 GMT


	Before anything else, I would like to congratulate Eric Lee
Green for his detailed, insightful, and non-ideological (all those
government-bashers just make me sick) look at the question.

In article <00714263890@elgamy.sccsi.com> elg@elgamy.sccsi.com (Eric Lee Green) writes:
>From article <1992Aug18.174828.18134@fid.morgan.com>, by joec@fid.morgan.com (Joe Collins):
>> In article <l9050rINNm9m@spim.mips.com> mpolen@gelato.mips.com (Michael Polen) writes:
>>>In article <1992Aug17.202017.17578@fid.morgan.com>, joec@fid.morgan.com (Joe Collins) writes:
>>>|> >In article <1992Aug6.013932.29133@s1.gov> lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich) writes:
>>>|> >  My solution to the US public schools' problems:
>>>|> >  Get rid of all the bureaucrats!
>>>|> I agree 100%

>And I agree 120%.

>Unfortunately, it is an uncomfortable fact of life that federal law
>MANDATES bureaucrats. ...

... Federal law pretty much mandates a special
>education bureaucracy, which must carefully scrutinize teaching materials
>and teacher activities in order to assure that we won't get sued in Federal
>court by a disgruntled parent (which happens several times a year, anyhow).

	I would suggest seriously streamlining the regulations; in
this age of personal computers, there should be no need for all this
paperwork.

	I'm not sure what is the most suitable approach for dealing
with lawsuit-happy parents. I don't know what progress has been made
-- if any! -- in lessening the volume of medical malpractice suits,
but anything that works well there should work here.

>I agree with the sentiment behind the Education for All Handicapped Act,
>but the actual implementation, as dictated by the courts and by the
>U.S. Department of Education, is a nightmare.

	If they are to be educated, then they will probably need their
own facilities.

... What I am finding is that kids in the public schools
>get just as good of an education as I did in the private schools -- *IF*
>their parents take the time and trouble to care about their education.
>Unfortunately, most parents don't. They drop the kid off at the front door,
>and say "Here, he's your responsibility now, don't bother me." Most parents
>won't even show up for parent-teacher conferences -- even when the teacher
>specifically called the parent and set up an exact time and place.

	Then they have no right to complain about the lack of
performance.

	If one of these parents decided to sue the school, then I
think that this non-cooperation ought to be used as evidence against
them, as demonstration of their lack of cooperation.

>Most private schools that I've encountered would kick the kid out if the
>parents didn't show up for the REQUIRED meetings. The public schools aren't
>allowed to do that.

	If not that, then perhaps some other penalty, like a fine.

>The Japanese OPPOSE school choice in the Japanese school system. They run a
>very centralized school system, and want to keep it that way. It works, for
>them. That's what they care about.

	Well, I don't think that anyone but a total fascist would
enjoy having their kids suffer a Japanese education. But I guess it's
something for them to work out.

>The Japanese also oppose educating special needs children in their
>classrooms. You do not see handicapped people in Japan. They are kept in
>shame in back rooms and basements all across the land. Here in the U.S.,
>federal law says that these kids must be educated, and must be educated in
>the least restrictive environment possible. This is expensive.

	I guess that this is a nice idea that went astray.

	It might have been better to work out compromise arrangements
or arrangements for special facilities.

>"Money spent on education" is not a good predictor. As you mention,
>much of that goes to administrators or into ornate administration
>buildings.

	Something that we can definitely do without.

"Money that reaches the classroom" is a very good predictor
>indeed. No teacher can teach without adequate supplies and materials.

	Why not specify that the money is to go directly there?

	I confess that this might be difficult to do without becoming
Federal micromanagement.

	Any other ideas for enforcing this resource allocation?

>I went to a Catholic high school. You needed to score in the 85th
>percentile of the PSAT in order to qualify for admission. My classmates
>were from upper-middle-income families with high aspirations. Those kids
>would have gone on to college no matter what school they went to.

	If that is typical of Catholic schools, then it is not
surprising that they do so well. They take the cream of the crop and
they don't have to worry about the less-successful students.

>I also went to a public high school for a year. I was in the "honors"
>classes. 85% of the students in those honors classes went on to college.

	So public schools aren't so bad, after all.

	How did the "honors" classes work?

>Wonders of wonders, eh? The public schools as effective with the same
>students as the private schools are?

	Good point.

>But, I find that to be true everywhere, now that I have a "bigger picture".
>There are families and kids who will succeed -- and both private and public
>schools do about as well with those kids. The other kids, well, they don't
>go to private schools.

	That's a conclusion a lot superior to the sort of ideology
that gets thrown around all too much.

>> In Washington DC, there is one adminstrator for every 54 kids in their
>> public schools. In the Catholic schools in the same city, there is
>> one administrator for every 2500 kids.

>This, in my opinion, is a disaster. No school system needs that many
>administrators.

	Precisely my point.

	What do they do all day???

>> > Interestingly, public school teachers make significantly more (on average)
>> than non-public schools teachers.

>Personally, I'd love to teach in a private school. There is a private
>school that'd love to hire me, too. I cannot, unfortunately, afford to
>teach in a private school. ...

	[complaint about discouraging would-be teachers if their
salaries are too low]

	The net.libertarians who call for supply and demand to work on
school systems ought to recognize that private schools will not be as
cheap if they have to start competing for teachers by offering them
good salaries.

	I'm pretty sure about how Catholic schools get the cost of
paying teachers down -- with vows of poverty, chastity, and obedience.
Does it actually work out that way?

	[Bitch about Bush trying to get upper-middle-income voters by
promising to subsidize one of their pet concerns]

	I guess that makes vouchers little better than pork barrel.
For all their self-professed fiscal conservatism, even Republicans are
not above that. Unfortunately, those who like this pork will defend
Bush as someone who brings home the bacon :-).

Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,talk.politics.mideast,misc.headlines