HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.edpolyan
Date:         Tue, 12 Jan 1993 14:59:48 MST
              <EDPOLYAN@ASUACAD.BITNET>
From:         Gene Glass <ATGVG@ASUACAD.BITNET>
Subject:      New E-Journal

        EDPOLYAR: NEW E-JOURNAL FOR EDUCATION POLICY ANALYSIS

      A peer-reviewed on-line electronic journal devoted to the
analysis of education policy has been created. It is operated as a
LISTSERV based at ASUACAD.BITNET. The editor is Gene V Glass of the
College of Education at Arizona State University, U.S. Inquires may
be addressed to him at ATGVG@ASUACAD.BITNET (Internet form of the
address is ATGVG@ASUVM.INRE.ASU.EDU).

     The journal will publish article-length manuscripts on
education policy as they are accepted by the editorial board. The
journal will be known colloquially as EDPOLYAR (for Education
Policy Analysis Archives). A companion list known as EDPOLYAN is
run as an unmoderated discussion forum for education policy
analysis. Published manuscripts will be sent to subscribers at the
time of acceptance and will be archived both as files for
subsequent retrieval and in annual notebooks for retrieval of
entire volumes or for remote keyword searching via LDBASE.

    To subscribe to EDPOLYAR, send an email letter to
LISTSERV@ASUACAD.BITNET and make the sole contents of your letter
read as follows:
                   SUBSCRIBE EDPOLYAR  <your actual name>

     It is anticipated that the first manuscript will appear within
a couple of weeks.

-------**********======================================**********-------
GENE V GLASS                                    ATGVG at ASUACAD.BITNET
College of Education                            ATGVG at ASUACVAX.BITNET
Arizona State University       Internet Address:ATGVG@ASUVM.INRE.ASU.EDU
Tempe, AZ 85287-2411
602-965-2692
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.edpolyan
Date:         Mon, 11 Jan 1993 18:18:18 -0500
              <EDPOLYAN@ASUACAD.BITNET>
From:         JFCOVALE@SUVM.BITNET
Subject:      Re: Schools: public or private

John- It was Linus, not Charlie Brown.  And if Clinton's public policies do not
attempt to redress the consitions that make him (or Hillary or Chelsea) want
for Chelsea to go to a private school, then your implication will be correct.
But as matters stand, if he sends Chelsea to Sidwell and improves the schools
in the public sector at the same time, exactly what has he done wrong. While
he was governor of Arkansas, Chelsea went to public schools and he worked to
improve public schools.  I will judge his job as president on the basis of
his policy decisions toward the schools.  But, if I have not been sufficiently
clear about htis as well, I too wish that he had made a statement by sending
Chelsea to the public schools.  It would have made a very strong statement.
But I still am unsure of what sin the Clintons are presumed to have committed
in their decision to provide the best possible education for their daughter,
assuming that they continue to advocate public policies for the imporvement of
education ofr all.   That seems to meet the obligations Bill Clinton has as
parent and as president.  He has done what he believes is best for his
child; is that not what "good parent" means?  Granted, we do not know if he
will do the same for the rest of us as president, but his record on education
is one of concern, whether we agree with the specifics of the policies or not.
It seems to me that the danger of failing to distinguish between the personal
and public goods that one pursues leads more often than not to public issues
being decided for personal benefit.  In evidence of that proposition, I offer
the lsat twelve years.  There may be a real benefit of having a presidnet who
can tell the difference between legitimate personal interest and public good,
and when the former can be pursued without harm to the latter.


****************************************************************
*                                                              *
*                    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, 12 Jan 1993 08:44:00 CDT
              <EDPOLYAN@ASUACAD.BITNET>
From:         "John O. Wong" <JOHNWONG@MACC.WISC.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Clinton:public/private

Jane,

>Try as I might, I can't see Clinton/Chelsea's choice as
>hypocritical...

The choice is not.  Indeed, it was the only reasonable thing to do.
The ratinale offered, however, was.  My objection is to the unwillingness
to openly recognize the problems with our public schools in the inner cities
of large metropolitan areas.

You said the obvious:  Somalia, economy, etc...  The president's plate is full,
and he must choose his battles.  Very true indeed.  But how much time and
effort does it consume to have his aides tell the truth: We ain't going to sent
Chelsea to a D.C. city school because (1) it is not safe, and (2) it is not
good??  The most disconcerting part of it all is to have intellectuals come
forth to provide moral justifications for what we call "a little white lie."



                                    # John Wong (608)263-3025
                                    # johnwong@wiscmacc.bitnet
                                    # johnwong@macc.wisc.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.edpolyan
Date:         Wed, 6 Jan 1993 16:19:25 EST
              <EDPOLYAN@ASUACAD.BITNET>
From:         JFCOVALE@SUVM.BITNET
Subject:      re: classic education books

Stan takes a rather dim view of this profession.  Much of what he says seems to
be "common sense" and rather a matter of faith.  But even if we take his view
as correct in some sense, it is worth noting the difference between teachers
learning their practice "mostly" by copying what they saw as students and just
doing as they saw done.  That "mostly" means that some get better with practice
and experience.  Like the apprentices to which he compares teachers, some
do become masters.

By way of clarification, Stan, by "no principles that constrain practice" do
you mean no algorithms of practice or no standards by which to make judgements
about practice?


****************************************************************
*                                                              *
*                    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-Acknowledge-To: <BMCINERN@PURCCVM>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.edpolyan
Date:         Tue, 12 Jan 1993 09:15:25 EST
              <EDPOLYAN@ASUACAD.BITNET>
From:         Bill McInerney <BMCINERN@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Clintons, choice, public & private lives

I have worked in the field of education for my entire professional life.
I spent 17 years of that working in a school district with 70% minority
students, 80% free and reduced lunches.  I currenty teach courses preparing
people for careers in school administration.  When my wife and I got ready
to buy a house in this area, we bought in West Lafayette, which has an
excellent school system catering primarily to "faculty brats."  We could
have bought in areas which would have put our children in a more inner-city
situation, or in a rural situation.  Am I less an advocate of good public
schools for all children?


  Bill McInerney                  o o O O O O O O O
                                 o    _______
  BMCINERN@PURCCVM               Y__'_|_|_|_| --++++++--
  BMCINERN@VM.CC.PURDUE.EDU      |__|_|  P  | | PURDUE |
  (317) 494-7299                {|____|_____|:|________|
  (317) 496-1228 FAX             /OO-----OO     OO   OO
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.edpolyan
Date:         Tue, 5 Jan 1993 17:26:08 EST
              <EDPOLYAN@ASUACAD.BITNET>
From:         RSN@NIHCU.BITNET
Subject:      Classic Education Books

The ERIC program is considering trying to assemble some lists--
arranged by thematic area--of the indispensable, classic
education books.  These would be the books that, at least in the
judgment of eminent educators, any education student would
absolutely have to be familiar with.  In considering whether--and
how--to pursue this activity, I would like to pose a few
questions to the group:

1.  Is this activity worth doing?
2.  Are you familiar with such lists that have already been
developed?
3.  Is it possible to reach agreement on who the most eminent
scholars in a given education field are, so they could be polled
as to their nominations for such reading lists?

Of course, any variant on the above questions are welcomed.

Bob Stonehill
Director, ERIC Program
U.S. Department of Education
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: EDPOLYAN@ASUACAD.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"EDPOLYAN@ASUACAD.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.edpolyan
Date:         Tue, 12 Jan 1993 11:52:00 EST
              <EDPOLYAN@ASUACAD.BITNET>
From:         SSOIFFER@CLARKU.BITNET
Subject:      Re: Schools: public or private

Amen to Patricia Gandara's observation.
Doesn't make much sense to simultaneously bankrupt
public schools AND strengthen class privilege, does it?

Steve Soiffer
Clark U.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: EDPOLYAN@ASUACAD.BITNET
X-VMS-To: @LIST.DIS
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.edpolyan
Date:         Mon, 4 Jan 1993 14:02:00 GMT
              <EDPOLYAN@ASUACAD.BITNET>
From:         HIGAB@EGFRCUVX.BITNET
Subject:      Teacher's Stress

      A doctoral candidate wants to get information about new
and effective psychotherapeutic techniques ( counseling program,
coping skills, relaxation technique...etc.) that can help in decreasing
teachers' stress. She prefers those techniques which can be described
in clear steps, so she can apply them in her study.

      She will acknowledge your help in her dissertation. Any help
would be greatly appreciated. Please, write your name; address and
e-mail address.

                            Happy New Year


                                              Ahmed K. Higab, Ph.D.
                                              The National Center for
                                              Educational Research
                                              Cairo, Egypt

                                              Bitnet: HIGAB@EGFRCUVX
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Acknowledge-To: <DCHRISTO@PURCCVM>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.edpolyan
Date:         Fri, 8 Jan 1993 14:28:46 EST
              <EDPOLYAN@ASUACAD.BITNET>
From:         "Dorothy J. Christoff" <DCHRISTO@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Need info

I know I asked this awhile (maybe a year or more) ago, but I can't
remember when and I've lost the answer.

Can anyone provide me with contact information (address, phone, name?)
for Teach for America?  I believe it's based somewhere in California (LA?).
It is geared for college grads with degrees other than education.  Takes
them into an intensive (2 months) training and then sends them out to
teach (in primarily inner-city schools) for a period of 2 years.

Private e-mail preferred - no need to clog up the list.

Thanks in advance for any help.

- Dorothy Christoff               O O O o o o o . . . . .
  Purdue University              O    =======
  DCHRISTO@PURCCVM.BITNET        Y__'_|_|_|_| --++++++--
  DCHRISTO@VM.CC.PURDUE.EDU      |__|_|  P  | | PURDUE |
  (317) 494-5485                {|____|_____|:|________|
  (317) 494-0587 FAX             /oo-----OO     oo  oo
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.edpolyan
Date:         Tue, 12 Jan 1993 12:09:58 -0600
              <EDPOLYAN@ASUACAD.BITNET>
From:         harden daniel <zzhrdn@ACC.WUACC.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Schools: public or private

I believe that Patricia Gandara's posting was an honest and open statement of
her goals as a social engineer.  My disagreement would be fundamental in terms
of what I see as the goal of education in America.  In my view, education must
emphasize the enrichment of the individual person -- wisdom and virtue -- rather
than the establishment, through social policy manipulation, of any sort of
egalitarian paradigm.

I find it passing strange how those who have such an ideological commitment to
"democracy" find it so difficult to allow parental choice to intrude into what
they really feel is their territory - education.  This is frequently - think of
Chancellor Fernandez in New York - site-based management is fine unless you
make decisions contrary to those desired by the educational establishment.  Then
you are very quickly "disestablished."  So much for site-based decision making!

Without a great deal of choice -- real choice -- I fear that most of the current
educational reform and restructuring will be, in reality, nothing more than a
few cosmetic changes which will allow the educational establishment to continue
as it has for a long while, albeit with a smiling face.

Dan Harden
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.edpolyan
Date:         Sun, 10 Jan 1993 19:12:43 EST
              <EDPOLYAN@ASUACAD.BITNET>
From:         Theo Leverenz <LEVERENZ@UKCC.UKY.EDU>
Subject:      Clinton/Gore private school choice

A couple of observations/questions about Clinton/Gore's choice to
send their kids to private schools:

  1.  Granted, DC schools are something less than good (and A LOT
      less than SAFE).  Am I to believe that teachers of the Clinton/Gore
      kids would _NOT_ do anything different to prepare for class each day?
      that there would be _NO_ change in the amount of drugs/violence in
      those schools?  That parents would _NOT_ become more involved (if
      only to see Bill and Hillery at PTA meetings and school Christmas
      programs)?

   2. Why do liberals assert the obligation of government to offset the
      costs of abortion for those unable to afford it on their own (i.e.
      who aren't rich enough), but see no such obligation to offer
      similar support for those who want to send their kids to private
      schools but are unable to afford it on their own (i.e. who aren't
      rich enough)?

   3. What DID Bill mean when he said America should not abandon its
      public school system? Did he REALLY intend to send the messege
      that his call for support was meant for everyone except him???
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-VMS-To: IN%"EDPOLYAN@ASUACAD.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.edpolyan
Date:         Tue, 12 Jan 1993 11:11:00 CDT
              <EDPOLYAN@ASUACAD.BITNET>
From:         "John O. Wong" <JOHNWONG@MACC.WISC.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Schools: public or private

>Amen to Patricia Gandara's observation.
>Doesn't make much sense to simultaneously bankrupt
>public schools AND strengthen class privilege, does it?
>
>Steve Soiffer
>Clark U.

This is like saying a small elite is fine in a feudal society.  But it would
bankrupt the system if we allow too many commoners to make the ranks.  That
would mean too few slaves working under even more improverished conditions to
support a larger number of the priveleged class!  Very practical thinking
indeed!

I am no supporter of the "voucher" system per se, but I see no reason why
experimentation on some small scale should be completely prohibited.  If a
schools district advances a plan of action which is "reversible," and the plan
is supported by district parents, why stand in the way?

Is "voucher" like cocaine?  You don't have to try it before you know it is bad?
Where do we find empirical evidence to buttress this position?

                                    # John Wong (608)263-3025
                                    # johnwong@wiscmacc.bitnet
                                    # johnwong@macc.wisc.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.edpolyan
Date:         Mon, 11 Jan 1993 09:34:36 EST
              <EDPOLYAN@ASUACAD.BITNET>
From:         JFCOVALE@SUVM.BITNET
Subject:      Re: Schools: public or private

On the question of school choice: we live in a country where the wealthy can
in fact purchase advantages for themselves and their children that the poor
cannot buy.  Private schooling is one of those things.  It seems to that
your question, Frank, is not: why shouldn't others have the same choice the
Clinton's have.  Rather, the underlying thing you are asking is: How can I
justify the Clintons action and deny public funds to others who want to make
the same choice?  There are two ways, I think, that we justify that: (1)
the voucher plans that are proposed to allow for use at private schools would
benefit the middle class, not the poor, leading to even greater class segrega-
tion than we know have.  Those students now in the worst schools would be left
in even worse schools, since the middle class would join the upper class in not
caring very much about the schools of the poor.  (2) Private money can be

spent with a great deal more freedom than public funds, which are supposed to
be defvoted to the public and common good.  It does not seem to me that as a
matter of public policy, it is a good idea to encourage the middle class to
withdraw their attention and support from the public (common) schools (though
it may well remain good public policy to allow the middle class to drive a
cheaper car or give up a second car or work overtime in order to afford a
private school for their children).

There is a different set of interests in public policy and private choice.
As a father, Clinton should make that choice that he believes will provide the
best education for his daughter; as President, he ought to be advocating those
policies which provide the best possiblke education for all children.  On the
face of it, a policy that will encourage the middle class to withdraw their
children from the common system does not seem likely to do so.


****************************************************************
*                                                              *
*                    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-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.edpolyan
Date:         Mon, 11 Jan 1993 15:57:38 PST
              <EDPOLYAN@ASUACAD.BITNET>
From:         Richard Everman <reverman@KA.REG.UCI.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Schools: public or private

Steve

Why should the "... size of the voucher ..." have anything to do with the income
level of the parent(s).  It was my understanding that the voucher was to cover
the cost of educating the student's.  Are you suggesting that it should be
another means of redistributing people's income?

Second question, why do you believe " ... The problem with (most) voucher plans,
I think, is that they will not do what they intend, to create a wider range of
choices for all."  I curious because of something I hear on the news a couple of
day ago while driving home from work.  The commentator state that in a recent
poll 88 percent of the parents of inter-city students supported the voucher
system.

Richard
reverman@uci.edu

*****************************************************************



In message <01GTE257R8RM99DIYR@asu.edu> Professionals and Students Discussing
Education Policy Analysis  writes:
> On the Clintons-as-poor-role-models/Isn't-this-a-good-argument-
> for-vouchers issue, I think John Covaleskie has hit the nail on
> the head. The problem with (most) voucher plans, I think, is that
> they will not do what they intend, to create a wider range of
> choices for all. They will, as John points out in somewhat more
> cautious wording, become middle-class entitlement programs, like
> the current Social Security program, or the way tax deductions
> for home ownership has worked out.
>
> One wonders whether we might feel differently about vouchers if,
> perhaps, the size of the voucher was inversely related to unadjusted
> income, and the size of the voucher offered to the poorest among
> us was really sufficient to pay for a student's schooling? Any
> other scheme, I am afraid, smacks of the old saw about, "The law
> in its majestic equality . . ."
>
> Even if vouchers were of a size in inverse relation to income, I
> would be sceptical. The track record of the privatization of
> essential social services is not, in my opinion, all that
> admirable. How well, for example, would we be served by voucher-
> driven education supplied by the folks who build public facilities
> without enough concrete or steel? Oh, but people like Westinghouse
> would NEVER do things like that with education, would they?
>
> Steve Soiffer
> Clark University
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Subject: (no subject given)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.edpolyan
Date:         Mon, 4 Jan 1993 14:19:19 MST
              <EDPOLYAN@ASUACAD.BITNET>
From:         bob stout <AORXS@ASUACAD.BITNET>

Subject:  School reform in Arizona
A bill is about to be co-introduced by the chairs of the House and
Senate Education Committees ( Lisa Graham and Bev Hermon) which
effectively repeals the Education Code of the State.  443 pages of
law are to be replaced by about 10 pages.  Key points:  funding
will attach to kids and follow kids to whatever schools they choose
wherever in the State.  Local school councils will be given authority
to set goals and standards, adopt curriculum, set policy, hire and
set wages of employees, admit students, etc.  School district
boards of education and central office administrators will be given
modest monitoring roles.  Schools will be given the budgets, but
can buy central office services if they choose.  And so it goes.
Very interesting to follow in the next 6 months.
Robert T. Stout, Arizona State University
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU