Quote:
Originally posted by baltassoc
Why? The next sentence is "But those choices must never come at the expense of what has been -- and must always be -- the great equalizer in our society -- public education."
I don't see why you elipsed through "and inclination" as well. You seem to interpret his statement to mean financial means, but that doesn't hold with his prior sentence, in which he lists alternatives, including home schooling - an alternative that doesn't require much wealth, but does require other means, namely someone who is able to home school. I have a friend who was home schooled for several years by hippy parents who during that time had essentially no income and lived off what they could grow on their small farm.
Or are you suggesting that children who attend public school are a "special interest"?
|
No I'm suggesting teachers unions are a special interest.
If he doesn't mean financial means, what does he honestly mean? Parochial schools generally require some funds, and often (particularly for scholarships or free tuition) require a religious affiliation (excluding those who don't consider compromising their religious beliefs to be acceptable "means"). Frankly, home schooling with few exceptions requires financial means - the parents having means to become sufficiently educated to be qualified to home school and for at least one of them to be economically unproductive. If financial means shouldn't be the deciding factor in the choices he thinks parents have, is he in favor of vouchers, then? What do vouchers do other than make financial means (more) irrelevant to whether parents (with the inclination - I elipsed it as irrelevant) have the "means" to choose what schooling they believe is best for their children? If freedom of educational choice "must never come at the expense" of public education, how can he be in favor of permitting those with "means" of whatever nature to escape, regardless of their inclination? FWIW, I don't recall that Dean favors vouchers w/in the public system, either (forcing public schools to compete with each other for student funds, but keeping all funds and students in the wonderful, equilizing public system generally).
He reminds me of a number of partners here who vigorously oppose vouchers because public schooling is a great equilizer and people should not be able to opt out to the detriment of the public system, but put their kids in private school.
ed for bad typing
