CNS News compares per-pupil costs to the taxpayer to student proficiency levels in a variety of Democrat-dominated cities.
In Philadelphia, where the Democratic Party held its national convention, the public schools spent a total of $18,241 per student in the 2011-2012 school year, according to the U.S. Department of Education.
In Detroit… the public schools spent a total of $18,361 per student that year.
In Washington, D.C., where the federal government makes its home, it was $23,980.
What did these schools produce while spending more than $18,000 per student? Not well-educated children.
In the Philadelphia public schools in 2015, according to the National Assessment of Educational Progress scores published by the Department of Education, 80 percent of eighth graders were not grade-level proficient in math. Eighty-four percent were not grade-level proficient in reading.
In the Detroit public schools, 96 percent of eighth graders were not grade-level proficient in math. Ninety-three percent were not grade-level proficient in reading.
In the District of Columbia public schools, 83 percent of the eighth graders were not grade-level proficient in math. Eighty-one percent were not grade-level proficient in reading.
If you pay federal taxes — no matter where you live and no matter where you send your children to school — you help subsidize the public schools in Philadelphia, Detroit and Washington, D.C.
In fact, if you pay federal taxes you help subsidize the public schools all across America.
What I have noticed about American education is that whenever anything is said about the poor performance of the government-run public schools, the teacher unions and school administrators all cry that the problem is not enough money.
But as you can see, we have been spending more and more money on these schools, but not getting any return on the investment:
Where is all that money going? A lot of it is donated to Democrats:
The Democrats repay the teacher unions by protecting them from competition from private schools and homeschoolers. Democrats shut down every attempt by Republicans to reform public school education to make it more responsive to parents.
In the free market, there is no protection for businesses that fail to perform. They have to shape up or shut down. Maybe instead of shoveling taxpayer money into a bottomless pit, we should give money for each child’s education directly to the parents, and let theparents choose schools that actually focus on the job of educating the children in valuable skills?
The CNS News article continues:
The cost and the poor performance of public schools in the United States should inspire Congress to do two things: Shut down the federal Department of Education and enact legislation creating complete school choice for families that reside in the District of Columbia.
Voters in states and local communities elsewhere in the country can then decide for themselves whether or not to replace the relatively small percentage of local school revenue that now comes from the federal government.
But the right decision would be for states and local communities to stop giving their education money exclusively to government-run schools.
Instead, they should give that money to parents — and let parents decide where to send their children to school.
Communities should grant every child in their jurisdiction a voucher worth the same amount of money currently spent per pupil in the local government schools. Then they should let families decide whether they want to send their children to one of those government schools or to a private school.
Attaching the money to the child makes the parents the consumer, and empowers them to buy the right school – the school that does the job that they want the school to do. Instead of focusing on global warming, gay rights, transgender bathrooms and putting condoms on cucumbers, the schools should be focused on math, engineering, technology and science. STEM is where the money is – not in liberal crybaby indoctrination.
Policies allowing a person who is biologically male to access women’s restrooms and locker rooms can create negative, unintended consequences, according to some sexual abuse survivors.
“The presence of a male of any variety, whether he’s somebody who identifies as a trans or not, whether he has deviant motives or not, that’s irrelevant to the reality that for survivors of sexual trauma to just turn around and to be exposed to that is an instant trigger,” Kaeley Triller, a sexual trauma survivor, said in a video created by Alliance Defending Freedom, a conservative, Christian legal organization.
The video explains from a first-hand perspective how unintended victims are the consequence of open restroom and locker room policies in place at some companies like Target and in schools, such as in Fort Worth, Texas.
[…]“People are afraid, and with good reason, because they’ve had experiences where they were in places where they were vulnerable and someone hurt them,” a woman named Autumn Bennett said in the video.
[…]Janine Simon, a sexual assault victim, shared her thoughts in the video.
“I’ve only been telling my personal story publicly for a few months,” Simon said. “I do it because I know there are so many kids out, there are so many kids out there already being abused. There’s so many kids out there that pedophiles, they’re just looking for a chance… We’ve just created a law that makes it easier for them to access their victims.”
[…]This year in Washington state, a man was reported to have undressed in front of girls in a women’s locker room.
“As long as the person says, ‘I identify as a woman,’ and they’re not doing something criminal like actually assaulting somebody, this rule gives them the legal right to be present,” Joseph Backholm, executive director of the Family Policy Institute of Washington, told The Washington Times in February.
And as I blogged before, the Obama administration, which is in the back pocket of the gay rights lobby, has ordered all the public schools in the nation to implement transgender bathroom access. Even if you pull your kids out of the public schools, you are still paying for the public schools to be run the way that the gay rights lobby wants them to be run. You can’t opt out of paying taxes to the Democrat Party.
Fort Worth, TX
What is scary is how this is even happening at the state and local level, in states that are supposedly conservative.
The public schools in Fort Worth — Fort Worth — are going trans-positive. Here’s a link to the new school policy, [UPDATE: Link corrected. Sorry! — RD] which is based on the new federal interpretation of Title IX. It’s in Scribd, so I can’t quote excerpts. Highlights include:
There doesn’t need to be a medical or mental health diagnosis involved. If a male student says he’s a girl, then he’s a girl, and vice versa.
Schools are instructed to keep the student’s asserted gender identity hidden from parents unless authorized to share that information with them.
School personnel are to consider themselves to be allies of a student undergoing gender transitioning. That means not telling their parents or guardians.
Transgender students must have the opportunity to participate in school sports as the gender they claim to be, though they are not guaranteed this as a right.
But there’s more. The Fort Worth schools are now compelling teachers and others to teach gender ideology to students. Highlights:
Teachers are no longer to call their students “boys” and “girls,” but to use gender-neutral language to refer to them, e.g., “students”
Classrooms are to “feature diversity” in their classroom materials
So, let’s recap: public school teachers and personnel in the Fort Worth Independent School District are now required by policy to instruct students that gender can be whatever you want it to be. And they are required to keep parents in the dark about their kids transitioning or presenting themselves as the opposite gender at school.
Not in Austin. In Fort Worth.
Where are the people in Fort Worth supposed to go to get their kids away from this? And where do they get the tax money they paid into the system back, if they do pull their kids out of these public schools?
My solution to this is to allow the victims of anything that follows from this to sue the public school administrators and the Democrat Party officials who put the policy in place, and make it very expensive for them. They understand lawsuits. But we’ll have to wait for a real conservative to be elected President before that happens.
A 4-year-old Aurora girl was kicked out of a preschool last month when her parents raised questions about books read in her class, including ones that told the stories about same-sex couples and worms unsure about their gender.
Her mother, R.B. Sinclair, sees it as sex education and wanted to opt her daughter out of those discussions.
Instead, school officials from Montview Community Preschool & Kindergarten in Denver — run as a private, parent cooperative — explained the stories were part of the school’s anti-bias curriculum, and because the discussions are embedded through the day, they told her that opting out was not possible.
The school’s anti-bias curriculum is part of a growing push in public and private school classrooms where educators use more diverse depictions of families and gender roles to expose students to differences before children have a chance to form negative opinions.
“Biases start as kids get older and start to see differences as negative. At a young age, kids are exploring all different kinds of things,” said Kim Bloemen, director of early childhood education for the Boulder Valley School District. “It’s about just providing them with all these experiences.”
In a letter sent home to Montview parents, the school defended the books and in a newsletter suggested ways for parents to discuss the topics at home.
School officials refused to comment for this story or answer questions about their curriculum or the goals they set.
[…]In Boulder’s public preschools, all teachers were trained this year to integrate a broader type of diversity to include gender and sexual differences and to have conversations with young children.
So, who is doing the training of the teachers in the public schools?
A Queer Endeavor, an initiative started in the School of Education at the University of Colorado at Boulder, has helped train 2,500 teachers over the past three years, including those in Boulder and in the St. Vrain Valley School District.
[…]The initiative helps teachers keep the focus on family structures and on being positive about differences.
More about “A Queer Endeavor” from their web site:
Housed in the CU-Boulder School of Education and led by Bethy Leonardi, PhD, and Sara Staley, PhD, A Queer Endeavor is an initiative focused on supporting teachers and school communities around topics of gender and sexual diversity.
[…]The work of A Queer Endeavor is made possible through a partnership between the School of Education at the University of Colorado Boulder and the generous support of the Twisted Foundation.
And it’s not just the gay activists who get into the schools to push their agenda. Schools who refuse to toe the line on gay activism will not be accredited:
Back to the Denver Post article:
Kristen Johnson, senior director of the Academy for Early Childhood Program Accreditation from the National Association for the Education of Young Children, a nonprofit that accredits preschools, said the organization’s standards require schools in some way to include depictions of nonstereotypical gender roles and families.
“The early-childhood years are the prime time to help children develop healthy self-identities as well as learn to respect and interact positively with people who are different from themselves,” Johnson said. “Reading books that are inclusive of diverse characters is an essential strategy for supporting self-esteem in children who are part of these families, as well as teaching children about the diversity of all families.”
So let’s see what happened:
public school teachers were trained by gay rights groups in LGBT propaganda (undermining heterosexual norms like monogamy and exclusivity, and undermining natural marriage)
four-year-old child indoctrinated to approve of redefinition of natural marriage and family, so that she won’t judge the selfish adults for redefining marriage
parents try to protest the LGBT propaganda, but they are told there is no opt-out, and their daughter is kicked out
Keep in mind that the parents of this four-year-old girl are taxpayers – they are forced to pay taxes that go to these public school teachers. There is no opt out of the lessons, and there is no opt-out of paying taxes for these public schools. And there is no transparency to parents or to voters – that’s the whole point of it.
Team LGBT wants children to adopt an anything-goes approach to relationships and sex, so that these children have a knee-jerk reaction against natural marriage as the best arrangement for children and for society.
The problem is that moral norms around natural marriage are there for a reason. By teaching children to “celebrate diversity”, they are removing the moral boundaries reduce harm in adults and in their vulnerable children. I understand what the gay activists want. They want to make a world where no one objects to a woman leaving husband, taking her 3 children, and moving in with her lesbian lover. They want children to think that is as good as lifelong married love between one man and one woman. But that woman’s children will be raised fatherless, which is bad for them. The gay activists and their allies in the public schools do not want selfish adults shamed or offended by anyone who articulates that natural marriage is best for kids and society. That’s why they are indoctrinating your kids – for their benefit. They want to be selfish, and not be disagreed with.
Here’s the end game of the gay activists, explained by a gay activist, and reported by The Blaze:
A 2012 speech by Masha Gessen, an author and outspoken activist for the LGBT community, is just now going viral and it includes a theory that many supporters of traditional marriage have speculated about for years: The push for gay marriage has less to do with the right to marry – it is about diminishing and eventually destroying the institution of marriage and redefining the “traditional family.”
[…][T]hose advocating for gay marriage have long stated that the issue will not harm traditional marriage. Ms. Gessen’s comments on the subject seem to contradict the pro-gay-marriage party lines.
Gessen shared her views on the subject and very specifically stated;
“Gay marriage is a lie.”
“Fighting for gay marriage generally involves lying about what we’re going to do with marriage when we get there.”
“It’s a no-brainer that the institution of marriage should not exist.” (This statement is met with very loud applause.)
As mentioned above, Gessen also talked about redefining the traditional family. This may have something to do with the fact that she has “three children with five parents”:
“I don’t see why they (her children) shouldn’t have five parents legally. I don’t see why we should choose two of those parents and make them a sanctioned couple.”
That’s the real goal of these gay activists and their public school allies. Getting children to not see natural marriage as normal. Getting children to not condemn selfish adults who don’t give children access to their biological mom and biological dad for life. The gay activists don’t want the obligations to do relationships and marriage in a way that benefits children. They want to make a world where the next generation of children won’t judge them for depriving kids of their mom and their dad. They don’t want kids to expect that men and women commit to each other self-sacrificially, monogamously and faithfully. They don’t want kids to expect that adults put their kids above their feelings and desires, for the benefit of the kids.
The end goal is to get rid of moral values and moral boundaries in romantic and sexual relationships, so that adults can never be judged for taking actions and living lifestyles that harm themselves and/or others – especially children who need a mom and a dad. We can allow people to live differently while still promoting natural marriage as the best environment for having and raising children. It is more important that selfish adults give children a mom and a dad, than that selfish adults indoctrinate children to affirm selfish adults who deny children a mom and a dad.
I hope everyone read my recent post about the dangers of public schools. Christians should make a plan to keep their kids away from these government-run schools. But the real solution is to stop the funding of these schools by taxpayer dollars. Parents should be able to buy the instruction they want for their kids, not be forced to pay for schools and teachers that do not reflect their values.
Do you think that the decision described in this Daily Caller article was made by parents or local school boards? (H/T Kris)
Michigan’s State Board of Education has drafted a guidance that would push the state’s schools to allow all students, regardless of parental or doctoral input, to choose their gender, name, pronouns, and bathrooms.
Spearheaded by board president John C. Austin and signed by state superintendent Brian Whiston, the guidance informs Michigan public schools that only the students themselves–i.e. not their parents or doctors–can determine what their individual gender identities are.
“The responsibility for determining a student’s gender identity rests with the student. Outside confirmation from medical or mental health professionals, or documentation of legal changes, is not needed,” the guidance states.
Gender identity is defined in the guidance as “a person’s deeply held internal sense or psychological knowledge of their own gender, regardless of the biological sex they were assigned at birth.”
Notably, the guidance makes no mention of a student’s age affecting whether or not they can pick a gender without their parent or doctor.
In fact, the guidance seems to intentionally cut parents out of the process.
The guidance states: “School staff should address students by their chosen name and pronouns that correspond to their gender identity, regardless of whether there has been a legal name change.”
Students can even ask to have their chosen name and gender “included in the district’s information management systems, in addition to the student’s legal name.”
But what about when school staff members are speaking with parents about their son or daughter?
The guidance states that “Transgender and GNC [gender nonconforming] students have the right to decide when, with whom, and to what extent to share private information.”
Accordingly, the board makes clear, “When contacting the parent/guardian of a transgender or GNC student, school staff should use the student’s legal name and the pronoun corresponding to the student’s assigned sex at birth, unless the student or parent/guardian has specified otherwise.”
In other words, a boy named “Jake” could become a girl named “Jane” at school, seemingly without his parents ever knowing.
Names, pronouns, and genders aren’t the only things the board wants students to choose.
The guidance informs schools that “Students should be allowed to use the restroom in accordance with their gender identity.”
[…]Locker rooms also should become inclusive of students’ many gender identities. “A student should not be required to use a locker room that is incongruent with their gender identity,” the guidance states. “Locker room usage should be determined on a case-by-case basis, using the guiding principles of safety and honoring the student’s gender identity and expression.”
[…]The board quietly issued the statement and guidance on February 23rd, without a press release.
[…]Board president John Austin did not immediately reply to The Daily Caller’s request for comment.
Previously, I wrote a post explaining why young Christians who are considering getting married and having children need to prepare themselves to bypass the public school sytem. It’s becoming increasingly clear that Christian parents cannot look to the public schools as allies in parenting their children in a way that respects the Christian convictions of the parents. The public schools are not allies.
Since Christian parents are forced to pay for public schools whether they use them or not, Christian parents should be voting for the political party that seeks to lower taxes, shrink government, and push control of education down to the state and local levels. Christian parents should also support politicians who are in favor of school choice – giving parents vouchers that allow parents to use the money for private schools or homeschooling options.
We need to get a lot smarter and vote for smaller government, local control of education and accountability to parents. The public schools are basically controlled by the sexual revolutionaries, e.g. – abortion providers, gay activists, etc. And that’s not even to mention the socialists, the global warming alarmists, the moral relativists, etc. If your goal for your children is to teach them marketable skills and basic moral values, then you need to get as far away from the public schools as possible. Including mandatory funding of them.
By the way, I should note that among his many other excellent qualifications, Ted Cruz also plans to abolish the federal Department of Education and push control of education down to the state and local levels. That would be a good start. He also plans to abolish four more federal departments, and push control down to the state and local level there, as well.
My friend William shared this excellent article from The Federalist, which talks about how public schools, under the influence of Common Core, are exposing children to pornography in order to advance a leftist culture agenda. The article has the stories of several heroic mothers who stood up to the school system and got the pornographic materials removed. Let’s look at one of them, and then I’ll comment on how public school administrators and teachers should be viewed, then I’ll comment on the issue of financing these public schools, then I’ll talk about planning for schooling of your children.
In 2012, Lebanon, Oregon, mother of two Macey France began studying the nationwide implementation of Common Core. While looking through a document titled “Common Core Appendix B” that contained reading exemplars, Macey found the book, “The Bluest Eye” listed as an example of appropriate assigned literature for eleventh- and twelfth-grade students.*
France, a contributor to the website PolitiChicks, took to her keyboard and typed up a scathing condemnation of the book as not high-school appropriate, including quotes directly from the book, such as:
I am not putting pornographic excerpts from public school books on this blog, duh.
As a result, her article “Common Core-Approved Child Pornography” was viewed and shared hundreds of thousands of times and Macey was nominated for a CPAC blogger award for Best Sunlight Post of 2013.
“This is when I first became a ‘target’ for the progressives who support public education and minimize parental rights,” said France, who had a hard time understanding how her well-researched, truthful article could make her the target of the kind of emotional, hateful rhetoric she experienced. It frustrated her to be personally attacked for wanting to protect her kids. It also frustrated her to find many parents who weren’t concerned about their teens reading “The Bluest Eye” because they believed school officials knew more about what was best for their children than they did.
“I was called names, accused of being backwards, racist [Toni Morrison is a black woman], ignorant, a flat-earther, and even received private messages on Facebook telling me how hateful I was,” France said. “I was first introduced to the phrase ‘white privilege.’ At one point, I was called Hitler. I was misunderstood and accused of wanting to ban and burn books [even though] I went out of my way to convey that I am not an advocate for banning literature. I am a huge parental rights advocate. I got the distinct impression I was not supposed to question the manner in which they [educators] related to my kids.”
My problem with public school is not that education school graduates are selecting high brow reading material that is above me. I love Shakespeare and Spenser and Dickens and Austen and other classical writers. The problem I have with public schools is that some of the teachers, and most of the administrators, have this agenda to break down traditional morality and sexualize children at earlier and earlier ages. This is part of the secular progressive agenda – they know that sexualizing children makes them less likely to become conservative, less likely to marry, less likely to have children who are raised by a mom and dad, and who are therefore more resistant to the will of the secular leftist government.
Public schools are leftist indoctrination seminaries
A good example of how this works can be found in the province of Ontario, Canada. There, the Liberal Party government is led by a lesbian woman who left her husband and children to move in with her lover. The Liberal Party decided to re-write the education curriculum so that it would be more in line with their supporters in the Sexual Revolution crowd, e.g. -secularists, LGBT activists, abortion providers, etc. And so, they hired a convicted child pornographer to re-write the curriculum. They didn’t see the public school’s priority as teaching children how to get the skills needed to find jobs that pay. They wanted the public schools to make children non-judgmental about the immoral behaviors of the selfish adults.
It’s very important for parents to understand that people don’t just find themselves in education programs and then in public schools by accident. Sometimes they are in there because they couldn’t find real work in the private sector. Sometimes they are there because they want to indoctrinate your kids with their left-wing ideology. You can’t assume that the people in public schools want to partner with you to pass on prudent and practical Judeo-Christian wisdom to your children. The public school monopoly attracts those who are looking for job security and insulation from the disapproval of their customers. It’s true that some teachers are there to educate students so they have useful skills in order to find good jobs. But in my experience, many of teachers aren’t, and most of the administrators aren’t.
Note: private school teachers and administrators have to compete with other schools, so they are sensitive to meeting the needs of parents. At least you have a choice about where you send your kids, so they have to care what you want for your kids, and how much you are able to pay.
Don’t vote for bigger government if you value quality education
So how do these public schools get their funding? Well, it’s simple. They appeal to voters by saying that the more they spend on public schools, the more children will learn. This actually works on voters who don’t bother to familiarize themselves with the facts:
The truth is that parents who want children to do well should always vote for smaller government, lower taxes, and the pushing down of decision-making in education policy to the state and local level. We shouldn’t be swayed by “it’s for the children” rhetoric, because throwing more money at the problem only gives us more sexual revolution indoctrination and more gay rights agenda. Most of the new money goes to administrators anyway – not to the teachers in the classrooms. You might think that the public schools are there to help your children to get a job, but that’s not what they public school administrators think they are there for.
Getting married? Make a plan to provide for your kids’ education
One final point. I am finding myself surrounded by male Christian apologists who want to get married, and who are not interested in being providers. They’ve spend their entire 20s in school as students, they’ve taken money from their parents, they’ve never worked a day in their lives, they have outstanding student loans, they have no savings, and yet they all talk to women they like about marriage. My view is that Christian men should not be allowed to talk to women – even to ask them the time of day or for directions – until they have a STEM degree, 2 years of private sector work experience, all debts paid off, a car and some savings. And why not? Well, for reasons like this article on the public schools.
The public schools are what they are, and Christian parents cannot rely on them to educate our kids. If a man is talking about marriage without having taken steps to get a STEM degree, STEM private sector work history, and an investment account that is added to every month, then he has no business talking to a woman about marriage. He has to be able to show her that he is serious about providing the children with homeschooling or a private school education. How parents plan to educate their kids is a major issue in marriage – it affects whether the children will be effective and influential, or not. A woman should not trust the promises of any man who has not taken practical steps in the past to prepare for the needs of his children in the future. She cannot accept intentions and promises that make her feel good, she has to see evidence of his ability to put aside his ambitions in order to provide for her and the children – that is his obligation as a man (1 Tim 5:8). A man who wants marriage should prepare well in advance for it by having a career that will allow him to earn and save so that his wife and children will not be threatened in their worldview more than they can bear. If he has to give up some student stuff and some ministry stuff in order to prepare for husband / father responsibilities, then he should do that – before the wedding day.