 |
|
Add to My Group
|
September 14, 2006 at 11:41:33
Thom Hartmann; Free Public Education; Why We Should Have it, Why the Cons Hate it by Thom Hartmann Page 1 of 1 page(s) |
|
 
|
A study in 2003 by a researcher at Yale University revealed that more than 50 percent of first-year college students couldn't produce papers free of grammatical errors--in simple language, they can't write. Eighty percent of graduating high school seniors say they will never again voluntarily read another book. Only one-third of U.S. students are proficient readers; two-thirds lack sufficient reading ability to comprehend novels, textbooks, and other forms of "complicated writing."
Democracy requires an educated middle class for its survival. At its most simple level, alone among political systems, democracy requires citizens to vote for the country's leaders and policies. If you can't read the ballot, if you don't know enough math to understand the economic argument a politician is making, if you don't know the history of the country and our laws, how can you decide how to vote?
Alexis de Tocqueville came to America in 1834 to figure out how Americans were making democracy work. Along the way he met with a pig farmer, just a simple country bumpkin by de Tocqueville's reasoning, and asked him about international politics. And this farmer went into an insightful, knowledgeable rant about French politics. De Tocqueville's conclusion was that a well-educated populace was essential to democracy--and that, unlike France in that era, we had one here.
Jefferson agreed. He advocated a national program of free education up to and including university. In an 1824 letter, he explained why: "This degree of [free] education would . . . give us a body of yeomanry, too, of substantial information, well prepared to become a firm and steady support to the government."
True to his word, Jefferson started the University of Virginia to provide free higher education to the yeomanry, which is what the middle class was called back in the 1700s. The state university system grew slowly over the years and really picked up under FDR.
But that didn't last long.
Governor Ronald Reagan ended free enrollment at the last state university system to offer it, the University of California, in 1966. Today government funding for higher education is at minimal levels, particularly compared with Europe and Japan, where in most cases university educations are free or nearly free. Although there are still some educational benefits for GIs, they're hard to accumulate, track, and qualify for (and must be paid for in most cases). Under George W. Bush, even the student loan program has been cut significantly, and eligibility for grants to low-income students-- called Pell Grants--has decreased dramatically; in 2004 alone, for example, Bush cut eighty thousand students off the eligibility list for Pell Grants.
Now the Bush administration wants to privatize K�"12 education, as well. Bush advocates replacing free public education with "tuition vouchers" good at private schools, including parochial schools and for-profit schools. His No Child Left Behind Act set up thirty-seven ways public schools could fail. A failing school is sanctioned under the act with a loss of funds--so that schools that need the most help get the least. By September 2004, 36 percent of California's schools had already been put on that list. Instead of being a program to improve public education, No Child Left Behind was designed to kill the public school system.
http://www.thomhartmann.com
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author
and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
 Contact Author |
Contact Editor |
 View Authors' Articles |
|
|
|
|
| 6 comments |
|
wow
The unmentioned casualty of this administration. Education has fallen off the radar for most people, and i agree with Mr. hartmann. I have worked with high school students and with special ed kids in NY, it is even worse in special education. Thanks for reminding us. by Anthony Wade (160 articles, 2 quicklinks, 44 diaries, 890 comments [19 recommended, 2 rejected]) on Thursday, Sep 14, 2006 at 10:30:02 PM  (0+)
|
|
No Child Left Interested
Because teachers have to teach to the test, learning has become boring. The kids hate it. They tune the lessons out and study enough to pass. Instead of having kids interested in learning, you have kids that have shut down and spend most of their time trying to socialize with their friends. Education in America, under No Child Left Behind, is doomed. It should be renamed No Child Left Interested. Thank you, George Bush, for robbing American kids of the joy of learning. The worst president in U.S. history? Not even close. by skyreader7 (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 181 comments) on Friday, Sep 15, 2006 at 5:20:33 AM (0+)
|
|
We export our jobs
and we will soon have to import our science. The Bush idea of science is "intelligent design" thus any real science is lost. Besides, who needs educated Americans anyway? They will just see through the ridiculous lies and incompetence of this administration and certainly be more than a bit unsatisfied working at Starbucks or McDonalds. by ardee D. (6 articles, 4 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 2377 comments) on Friday, Sep 15, 2006 at 7:01:48 AM (0+)
|
|
Public Education
I've been teaching for a long time. There can be little doubt that the purpose of NCLB and other education "reforms" and accountability movements are the eventual privatization of the public education system. This goal has to do with money, of course, but also with a philosophy of governance that repudiates the notion of virtually all public ownership of institutions or resources. As Jefferson understood, a representative democracy requires both a knowledgeable electorate and public wealth. Aristocratic rule, on the other hand, requires the exact opposite. While we repudiated aristocratic rule with the Revolution, we actually institutionalized its roots by equating the pursuit of happiness with the acquisition of unlimited, private wealth, thus making the creation of a native aristocracy based upon wealth inevitable. That such a class of concentrated wealth and thus power would seek to rule is self-evident. by ed clark (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 2 comments) on Friday, Sep 15, 2006 at 9:22:17 AM (0+)
|
|
Changing teachers too
Creating a sterile, uncreative, almost military, corporate mindstate in the classroom will drive out the best, most caring, most dynamic teachers. The cons are maggots, eating away, eroding the body of America. by Rob Kall (953 articles, 4178 quicklinks, 374 diaries, 2087 comments [45 recommended, 3 rejected]) on Friday, Sep 15, 2006 at 7:53:43 PM (0+)
|
|
You're 100% correct
Just the other day I commented to my sister Bush is out to create an uneducated population, because it's easier to oppress people who are ignorant. It's true, he's doing it. Decreased funding for Pell grants, higher interest rates on student loans, the dreadful "No Child Left Behind," and the other dispicable things you listed prove it. He seems to be intent on sending us straight back to the Dark Ages, when only the ruling classes and religious leaders could read. Education is power. When someone is educated they can pull themselves and their families out of poverty, think for themselves and make informed decisions, among other things. Power in the hands of the general population goes against everything in the Bush Regime agenda. Great article, it's nice to know I'm not alone in my opinion. by Amanda Butler (3 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 21 comments) on Friday, Sep 29, 2006 at 3:36:30 PM (0+)
|
Want to post your own comment on this Article? 
|
||||
|
||||||||||||||
Must Read (0) 
Well Said (0) 
News (0) 
Touching (0) 
Funny (0) 
Supported (0) 
Interesting (0) 
Inspiring (0) 
Valuable (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tell a Friend:
|
Copyright © 2002-2009, OpEdNews |
