Catholic leaders push school vouchers at Capitol

[JReducation]

*Archbishop Charles Chaput was inundated with complaints after school closings in Philadelphia. Chaput unleashed a few complaints of his own in his weekly column.

“Some Catholics, too many, seem to find it easier to criticize their own leaders than to face the fact that they’re discriminated against every day of the year. They pay once for public schools; then they pay again for the Catholic schools,” he wrote.*

I’m a Catholic school alumna, step-parent who pays for 1/3 of my step-daughters’ Catholic school tuition, and a tax payer. I don’t feel as if I’m being discriminated against when I pay for both my community’s public schools in addition to my step-daughters’ tuition.

I’m willing to pay for public schools just like I’m willing to pay for police and fire services services, even if I never I never call 911, even if my home owner’s association has private security. Same with public health services; I’m glad that the poor person next to me on the bus is getting her tuberculosis treated, even if it’s my money paying for her Myambutol.

If Catholic schools want to step into the shoes of the public schools, they have to be willing to do so completely, in every state and community, all the time, just like public schools do. This means accepting students who don’t speak a lick of English, students who need home health studies while they undergo chemotherapy, students who pregnant or who are parents themselves, students who aspire to Ivy League schools and students who are on probation or parole, students who are habitually truant, and students from highly mobile families. If Catholic schools are willing to provide those kinds of services and more, if they’re willing to accept every kid regardless, period, I say go for it.

But, the only Catholic high school in my community states right on its website that the minimum TOEFL score they will accept for admission is 550 and they provide no academic support services for special needs students. So should they accept public money if they can’t or choose not to provide for all students?

Luna

The point is what is the moral right of parents. If the state has the means that allows parents to pay for a private education, then the state has a moral duty to make those means available.

We have to stop thinking like Americans for one moment and think like Catholics first. We’re Catholics who accidently happen to be Americans, not Americans who are accidently Catholic

The moral code is very clear. The state has a duty to do what is right even when it’s not the popular thing to do. This takes us back to the fact that if we already have government funded education programs that allow some students to attend private schools without doing any harm to the public school system, why can’t we look at how those programs work and expand those services to the larger population of students.

The National Association of Independent Schools (NAIS), which unites over 1100 non-religious schools in the country has been lobbying for vouchers, tax breaks for parents, and government funded scholarships for years. In many states they have won are are getting students who come with such funds, while they retain their autonomy from the state government. The state’s requirements are very reasonable. In those states where the the state has made unreasonable requirements, the NAIS has filed law suits against the states.

These private schools vary, as do public schools. Some serve students with certain kinds of special needs. Others serve students with other kinds of special needs. Some serve students who are gifted and talented. Some are college prep schools. Some even serve students who are pregnant or are parents or adjudicated youth.

We also have Catholic schools that serve these populations. You may want to take a closer look around the country.

Students who are lower functioning and more dependent need special assistance from coaching to clusters, which comes at a very high price that many public school systems cannot afford. If they could, they would be not in court every month being sued for non-compliance and paying private school tuition for many of these kids.

While it looks good on paper, public school teachers and administrators will tell you that they would welcome the relief. While these are well trained professionals, they are not enough and they don’t have enough resources to serve every child from the disabled to the gifted. This cry is not coming from teachers who go home frustrated every night, because they feel that they have not done enough. However, they can’t do more, despite their good intentions and their excellent qualifications.

Instead of making this a Catholic vs public education issue, we need to look at it as a parental rights vs the duty of the state. The state has a moral duty to treat the parents with fairness. We should look at how successful these private - public programs are and that they have been in existence since 1975 and growing. Maybe we need to examine the benefits to everyone involved and then remind the state that it has a moral duty to do the greater good, not just the good enough. That is the proper Catholic response to this question.

I believe that the Catholic schools are the late arrivals at this party. Many Protestant and Jewish schools have deliberately joined NAIS to get the same benefits for their parents and have the legal protection of NAIS and the lobbying power. NAIS began this journey because they figured out that it was possible for the states to help the parents without breaking the bank. As I said, some states are finding that it helps them and they make a lot of use of private schools for different sectors of the population. Teachers and principals in the over crowded schools are grateful for the relief.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[manualman]

The inability of catholic to recognize when they are being exploited continues to shock me on this issue.

My local public school district is the third worst in Illinois and yet spends about $14,500 per student per year all told. They get this money from ME, of course in the form of various taxes, mostly property tax. So I am forced to pay for public education, which is a reasonable use of government tax powers. But that education takes a form which, de facto, sends the message that God is irrelevant at most (since His role is never mentioned in social studies, history, literature, etc). If I go that route, my children will be receiving an indictrination into the state religion of de facto atheism.

If I object to that, I must continue to pay for the public school cost AND for catholic tuition. In effect (if not name), this is a religion tax.

Now the public school defenders make a good point too. Public schools must take any and all comers, including those that create very high costs (non-english speakers, special ed, behavioral problems, etc). There is an easy solution that addresses BOTH of these realities: a partial voucher. Offer, say, $1,500 property tax credit/child to parents of students who choose alternate schooling methods IF the student receives test scores at least equal to the average at the public school they WOULD attend if they weren’t privately educated (probably necessary to weed out fraudulent schooling schemes). Some alternate evaluation means would be necessary for special ed.

Everybody wins: The public district ends up with MORE funding available per student (because private schooling will go way up and they save $13k per new private student in expenses), the private school families aren’t paying double anymore and parents finally have a feasible choice in how their kids are educated.

The status quo is a slow strangle for private schooling. The government already blows an unbelievable $14,500 per student on lousy outcomes and it goes up all the time. We’ve reached the far limit of who can afford to pay both the taxes to support that bloated system AND pay 100% of the private school tuition.

 

[JReducation]

The inability of catholic to recognize when they are being exploited continues to shock me on this issue.

Now the public school defenders make a good point too. Public schools must take any and all comers, including those that create very high costs (non-english speakers, special ed, behavioral problems, etc). There is an easy solution that addresses BOTH of these realities: a partial voucher. Offer, say, $1,500 property tax credit/child to parents of students who choose alternate schooling methods IF the student receives test scores at least equal to the average at the public school they WOULD attend if they weren’t privately educated (probably necessary to weed out fraudulent schooling schemes). Some alternate evaluation means would be necessary for special ed.
.

What people don’t know is that there are two federal laws that require public schools to pay private school tuition at 100% for any student whom they can’t educate. The first was passed in 1975, PL 94-142 and the second in 1992, IDEA.

The public schools have to educate all students, but not on their campuses. If the parent is not satisfied, federal law grants the parent the right to due process. The way that the law is written is that the burden of proof is on the school, not on the parent. The school must prove that it is providing an appropriate education. If they cannot convince the hearing officer, he has the power to mandate that the school pay for a private school education. If the school or the parent is not satisfied with the hearing officer’s conclusion, either one can appeal in federal court. All of this is paid out of tax dollars, regardless of who wins. Usually the parent wins.

The state only has the right to oversee the academic content of what the student receives in the private school. The school can be a religious school. Some are. The state cannot demand that the student not be placed in religion class, not be required to pray or not be exposed to a crucifix, Star of David or cross. The law only covers the benchmarks set by the state. It does not cover anything outside of that.

If the private school is a religious school, it cannot charge for the religious education component. That does not mean that it cannot require it while the student is in attendance, as long as it’s treated as an academic subject. Just like any public school can teach a course on religion, bible history or some such thing, so can the private school. It’s all in how it’s called.

The benefit to the child, the parents and the public school teachers who are relieved to have one less kid to worry about are enormous, not to mention the monetary benefit. The local public school still has to be funded for that child that is in its census, but not enrolled. He is still their student and must be included in their budget.

In reality, the state just has to look at what it has done with the students who have special needs, with charter schools, with magnet schools, and with other entitlement programs to see that they work, save time and energy, and are cost effective. It’s not just the special needs kids who are being funded to attend school away from their home school. So are the kids in charter schools and magnet schools. Charter schools and magnet schools are not obliged to admit every kid who walks in the door. It’s by application, even though they are funded by the local school district. Both reserve the right to dismiss the kid and send him back to his community school if he fails to meet their standards.

This whole argument that the public schools cannot segregate and Catholic schools can is not real. Public schools do segregate kids an if parents push hard enough, they even pay for private school education when they can’t prove that they can meet a child’s needs.

Why go through all this trouble? Answer: Someone has decided to make this a public vs Catholic school issue, forgetting the other 2,000 private schools in the nation that educate kids with public funds, the charter schools and the magnet schools. Charter schools and magnet schools cost a small fortune to operate and the parents don’t pay a single cent in tuition.

It begs the question, why not look at what’s being done in other areas of education and expand the benefits? Why not learn from states who have these programs? Why not give parents a tax shelter, if you don’t want to give them a check?

We give parents a tax shelter to send their kids to the local community college which costs a few pennies on the dollar. We give them a tax shelter to send their kids to Notre Dame too. We don’t make a Catholic vs State college issue out of it.

This whole thing is really anti-Catholic nonsense. No one has ever raised an eyebrow when NAIS started to get paid for educating public school kids. Why not? Answer: NAIS does not include Catholic schools. It includes Jewish and Protestant schools along with many non-religious schools. They even get accredited by the same accrediting organizations that accredit public schools.

Catholics who are so strongly defending the public school system need to think about charters, magnets and non-Catholic private schools paid to pick up kids with disabilities and kids who are gifted and talented. Heck, there are even some Catholic schools that get paid to pick up some of these kids. Some school districts have contracts with the local diocese. The school district does not put it on the front page of the local paper or the 6:00 news; but the parents of the kids know who they are and they don’t mind having their kids attend a Catholic school, even if they’re not Catholic. They just want an education that works for their kids. I think parents who home school should also get a tax break, if they don’t already get one. Homeschooling is not free.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[Luna_Lovecraft]

I’ve had a first-hand opportunity to compare education in both private and public sectors as a teacher. When I began my teaching career in the 80s I spent one year teaching in a private school in suburban Detroit. This August will mark the beginning of my 11th year as a public school teacher in California. I’ll be the first to stand up and say that I’ve been in public schools to which I would not send my child, some of them is here in the city where my husband and I presently live. And I also think Catholic schools are superior to most public schools, which is why I was the driving force for getting my step-daughter enrolled in one.

Despite this, and despite what’s been said on this thread, one of my biggest concerns about vouchers remains that they will take dollars away that are desperately needed for general improvements in public schools and our efforts to reduce class sizes, enhance teachers’ performance, and provide every student with books and technology as well as safe, clean, and orderly schools.

What education in America really needs is help for the students, teachers, and schools that are struggling, not those who are already successful, those whose families would most benefit from implementation of voucher programs. The performance on state and federal tests in not only my district but in many other districts in California shows that children born to families in lower socio-economic circumstances are those who are at greatest risk and are, therefore, those who are in greatest need of assistance. For this reason, vouchers aren’t the best idea for solving our educational problems; true equity means that every child should be able to attend a good school. But vouchers are not designed to help low-income children. The father of the vouchers program, Milton Friedman himself, dismissed the idea that vouchers can help low-income families when he said, “It is essential that no conditions be attached to the acceptance of vouchers that interfere with the freedom of private enterprises to experiment.” Accordingly, I suspect that vouchers would only encourage greater economic and ethnic stratification in our society.

In the most recent year for which I have numbers, 2008, $65 million dollars was spent by religious organizations, foundations and individuals to promote school voucher programs. In election years like this one, voucher advocates spend even more on ballot measures and in support of pro-voucher candidates. I can’t spend too much energy thinking about the difference that kind of money would make to my district, which trimmed $72 million from its budget last year, my blood pressure just goes up.

If school vouchers become the norm, I fear our most at-risk students will be even more at risk as limited public funds are drained off and redirected. We witnessed this in our district with charter schools, many of which opened in the mid-2000s and closed with the economic downturn, putting hundreds of poor and/or SPED students back in our district, sometimes mid-year with no increased per pupil funding. Private schools will turn out well-trained, socially-advantaged young men and women (like my stepdaughters p). The rest of our kids, sadly, will have been left behind despite “No Child Left Behind”. And our government by corporate culture, private interests, and voter apathy, will slip ever closer towards oligarchy.

Luna

 

[Elizabeth502]

I’ve had a first-hand opportunity to compare education in both private and public sectors as a teacher.

So have I. So have several other people on this forum. Some of our conclusions as to how to fix the problem do not necessarily coincide with your assumptions, despite experience in both sectors.

one of my biggest concerns about vouchers remains that they will take dollars away that are desperately needed for general improvements in public schools and our efforts to reduce class sizes, enhance teachers’ performance, and provide every student with books and technology as well as safe, clean, and orderly schools.

It’s way too late to resurrect the tired argument that money will fix the problem. That “solution” has proven inadequate & wasteful in districts, counties, and states which are the most publicly subsidized in the nation. It is the culture of the public schools which prevents the kind of achievement which is possible in the privates – namely, student accountability, family accountability, administrative economy, standards of discipline far different from public schools, liberation from bureaucracy (civil & labor unions), and a refusal to substitute social services for academics.

This is why I myself no longer teach in public schools, despite my paid roles in education continuing to assist public school students for the most part. I no longer teach there because the current model of most public school settings is a broken model: it is a model which cannot meet its goals, as it supports the dysfunctions within society rather than provide prescriptions for them. It is a model which does not address the very socioeconomic gaps which you raise, and which derail education (and of which I am quite aware), but rather deceives the public into believing those chasms can be closed by an inefficient, hopelessly layered bureaucracy which requires the student to put out little effort for a minimalist school day and year.

Experiments among the U.S. rural poor in the deep South, with pilot reading programs, demonstrated how fugitive achievement is for children whose parents cannot intellectually support the student’s needs, or relate to them. After much investigation, it was determined that a more productive use of money would be to educate parents with low literacy, given the more pervasive and permanent influence of home on the education of every child.

However, even without such initiative (and the funds for that), private schools with impoverished student bodies still overall do better than public school counterparts because of different behavioral expectations and more efficient focus in private schools. Exceptions are among some charter schools in impoverished communities, which much more nearly resemble private schools than modern public schools.

 

[JReducation]

The biggest issue that is not being faced head-on by many Catholics who teach is public schools is morality.

As a Catholic educator, I was horrified to find that while the tests showed that the students could perform certain academic tasks, they did not tell the whole story. They did not tell the world that our public schools endorse and encourage sexual promiscuity. All that a child has to do is walk down to the nurse’s office and pick up a few condoms. Health and sex education is about safe sex, and tolerance. Tolerance of what? Same sex relations, unmarried heterosexual couples, alternative families, contraception and abortion.

The tests do not show that the students have very poor social skills along with very low moral values, because the schools are not allowed to teach natural law and natural consequences. Relativism is the only ethical education that is allowed in our public schools. Everyone’s opinion is right as long as “it does not hurt anyone else”.

Now that I run pregnancy centers, programs for teen dads, and a religious community that cares for those who are terminally ill, I’m seeing the fruits of the so called achievement oriented public education system. I’m seeing good kids struggling with abortion, dying of AIDS, struggling to raise an infant, when they themselves have not finished growing up. I’m seeing good kids living in homes with two fathers or two mothers who were told by our public educators that these were alternatives to the traditional family. I’m seeing young men walk away from their pregnant girlfriends, because they are taught in our public schools that a pregnancy is not their business. It’s the girl’s business. The boys only become part of the picture, if the girl decides to keep the baby. Their masculinity is dependent not on their God-given sexuality, but on the choice of their pregnant girlfriend.

I’m stunned when Catholics who teach in public schools say that more money is the fix to the problem and that we have to work harder on helping kids pass standardized tests. Even in the best public schools, a standardized test is not a measure of moral development, social skills or character.

That is not to say that students in private schools never have these problems. However, the environment and the values education of most private schools minimizes the possibility of malformation of young people. While we cannot eradicate the culture of relativism, the culture of death and the culture of promiscuity, we can throw hurdles in its path. Public schools are not free to do that.

To say that this is the duty of parents is like saying that it’s the duty of parents to make sure that it does not rain today. There are so many forces at work in the lives of these young people, that parents can’t do it alone. The kids spend more time with teachers than with parents. Teachers have to share in the parental role. To say otherwise is a cop out.

Our children can no longer afford teachers who are academic experts and moral blanks. They need educators who will address the whole person, not just the skills necessary to pass an achievement test.

It is very sad when our education system places such high value on skills and none at all on human integrity. That’s not the fault of the kids. It’s the fault of a broken system that we keep trying to defend and to fix by throwing money at it.

If Catholics are to be truly prophetic in the market place, the public school is the place to start. They should put as much energy into values education, teaching sexual integrity, natural law and natural consequences as they put into passing an achievement test that will not make you a better human being or functional adult.

This is one reason, among others, that I chose to leave the school system and enter religious life. I could do more for the kids outside of the system than I could do inside the system. When I sit the kids on the street and challenge their moral choices and point out the lies that they have been allowed to believe, no principle and not school regulation can tell me that I cannot teach the truth. I’m finding that I spend time tutoring kids in math, reading and writing as I’m telling them about their moral duties and rights. i could not do this in a public school, because the other Catholics who worked with me would not support me in challenging the system. Instead, they supported the system. They were teachers first and Catholics second. They were all for tolerance and equality in education at the expense of a kid’s soul. I find that stunning.

We have to look at the choices that parents have and make those available to them, via vouchers, tax shelters, scholarships, funding or whatever other creative means we can find.

I’m not saying that vouchers are the solution. But I am saying that parents have a moral right to make the best choices for their children and the state has a moral duty to uphold that right and make it possible for the parent to exercise it. If the state takes money out of the parent’s pay check that the parent can use to provide for a better education, then the state if failing its moral obligation. The citizen does not live to support the state. The state exists to support the citizen.

Public education has to be a means, not an end. Too many people are making it a moral end. When Catholics jump on that wagon, then we’re in serious trouble. No Catholic educator should ever stand between the parent’s right to use his tax dollars for the moral and academic welfare of his child and the moral vacuum in our public education. Any Catholic teacher that comes between the two needs to examine his commitment to his faith. Either close the moral vacuum or let the parents who choose to use their tax dollars to find better environments.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[JimG]

The biggest issue that is not being faced head-on by many Catholics who teach is public schools is morality

As a Catholic educator, I was horrified to find that while the tests showed that the students could perform certain academic tasks, they did not tell the whole story. They did not tell the world that our public schools endorse and encourage sexual promiscuity. All that a child has to do is walk down to the nurse’s office and pick up a few condoms. Health and sex education is about safe sex, and tolerance. Tolerance of what? Same sex relations, unmarried heterosexual couples, alternative families, contraception and abortion.
. . .

That is not to say that students in private schools never have these problems. However, the environment and the values education of most private schools minimizes the possibility of malformation of young people. While we cannot eradicate the culture of relativism, the culture of death and the culture of promiscuity, we can throw hurdles in its path. Public schools are not free to do that.
. . .

This is one reason, among others, that I chose to leave the school system and enter religious life. I could do more for the kids outside of the system than I could do inside the system. When I sit the kids on the street and challenge their moral choices and point out the lies that they have been allowed to believe, no principle and not school regulation can tell me that I cannot teach the truth. I’m finding that I spend time tutoring kids in math, reading and writing as I’m telling them about their moral duties and rights. i could not do this in a public school, because the other Catholics who worked with me would not support me in challenging the system. Instead, they supported the system. They were teachers first and Catholics second. They were all for tolerance and equality in education at the expense of a kid’s soul. I find that stunning.

We have to look at the choices that parents have and make those available to them, via vouchers, tax shelters, scholarships, funding or whatever other creative means we can find.

I’m not saying that vouchers are the solution. But I am saying that parents have a moral right to make the best choices for their children and the state has a moral duty to uphold that right and make it possible for the parent to exercise it. If the state takes money out of the parent’s pay check that the parent can use to provide for a better education, then the state if failing its moral obligation. The citizen does not live to support the state. The state exists to support the citizen.

Public education has to be a means, not an end. Too many people are making it a moral end. When Catholics jump on that wagon, then we’re in serious trouble. No Catholic educator should ever stand between the parent’s right to use his tax dollars for the moral and academic welfare of his child and the moral vacuum in our public education. Any Catholic teacher that comes between the two needs to examine his commitment to his faith. Either close the moral vacuum or let the parents who choose to use their tax dollars to find better environments.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

There are many on this thread who are more knowledgable about public education than me. But reading this post was sobering. It sounds as though we actually do our children a disservice by sending them off to public schools. Are we paying simply to ensure their indoctrination into moral relativism? There was a time when even public schools educated the whole person, teaching right conduct and moral integrity as a matter of course.

 

[Elizabeth502]

It may surprise a number of posters/lurkers (but may not surprise others) that the Catholic Church, the Catholic population, and Catholic schools, do not have a monopoly on morality in this country, nor when it comes to the integration of morality within a school curriculum. I say that being the biggest booster I personally know, of Catholic education. They were my most memorable years in my own formation & education, and thus I have sent my own children to Catholic schools, and regret none of it.

Nevertheless, people belonging to various Protestant sects, and American Muslims, are so deeply concerned about the amorality in public schools that there are communities of both who have “vouchered” themselves, as communities, to create their own counterculture to what dominates in public schools. That’s exactly what charter schools are: they are community vouchers (as opposed to individual vouchers). They are the use of public money to create, in common purpose, an alternative school site (or public homeschool model, funded by the gov’t), the mission of which, rules of which, membership which, is “privatized” (individualized) by that community which creates, maintains, and governs the charter. It’s public money which people “travel with,” outside of the local public school site, to choose a model which pleases them or which they prefer.

In largely minority charters, the charter community is opposing the immorality of (often) the local culture. Thus, in black and Latino communities, the charter community forms a bulwark against the local culture of drugs, crime, gangs, functionally parentless households, promiscuity, unwed teenage parenting, disrespect of authority, and the ridicule of academics – and not just a bulwark, but creates positively a replacement culture standing for the exact reverse of the surrounding local culture. While not a “religious” agenda or curriculum per se, it is nevertheless a school environment drenched in civic virtue and what used to be referred to in public schools as common everyday (human, “secular”) virtue: honesty, integrity, personal responsibility, a rigorous work ethic, compassion for neighbor, participation in the wider community (country), fortitude, and much more. Indirectly, these school environments often integrate into those settings the values of the families which compose them, which include Catholic Latinos and Black Baptists (for example). I assure you that (unlike neighborhood site schools), no student is getting condoms at the office. And the much longer and much more serious school day makes it possible for students to maintain achievement and personal growth in virtue outside of most family settings which do not mirror those settings.

Not all charters run equally well, but of the many I have seen and taught in, the only ones which do not run well are those not professionally managed (such as the uneducated leading the uneducated).

American Muslims have similarly vouchered themselves, as communities, to create environments which serve the dual purpose of language needs (from a variety of household languages) for an English curriculum, plus a school culture which resists and protects from the early sexualization of females in contemporary America. These schools mandate not just uniforms but modesty, the absence of ‘rap’ and other female-degrading music on campus; prohbit profanity, and enforce respect for authority. Just understand that when such charters for Muslim communities are formed, the school year is constructed with the Muslim holidays and the Muslim week as the priority; thus, school ends at noon on Friday, etc. And yes, folks, this is all public money. I have taught in these schools.

Now, if Catholics were really smart , they would form similar public charters in which the Holy Days were sort of cleverly worked into the calendar just as Muslim charters have done for their own religious holidays, with public money. Not to mention having control over the curriculum, which is standard also for other charters.

Think about it, guys. So far, all Catholics have done – as a protest and as a practical solution-- is homeschooled. There’s nothing wrong with that (I love homeschooling, and have done it professionally), but you pay out of pocket for that. You can voucher yourselves as communties and get a Catholic education with public money. It’s time to oppose the Soviet-style morally arid control over our country’s children which is represented by modern American schooling.

Organize.

 

[JReducation]

It may surprise a number of posters/lurkers (but may not surprise others) that the Catholic Church, the Catholic population, and Catholic schools, do not have a monopoly on morality in this country, nor when it comes to the integration of morality within a school curriculum. I say that being the biggest booster I personally know, of Catholic education. They were my most memorable years in my own formation & education, and thus I have sent my own children to Catholic schools, and regret none of it.

Nevertheless, people belonging to various Protestant sects, and American Muslims, are so deeply concerned about the amorality in public schools that there are communities of both who have “vouchered” themselves, as communities, to create their own counterculture to what dominates in public schools. That’s exactly what charter schools are: they are community vouchers (as opposed to individual vouchers). They are the use of public money to create, in common purpose, an alternative school site (or public homeschool model, funded by the gov’t), the mission of which, rules of which, membership which, is “privatized” (individualized) by that community which creates, maintains, and governs the charter. It’s public money which people “travel with,” outside of the local public school site, to choose a model which pleases them or which they prefer.

In largely minority charters, the charter community is opposing the immorality of (often) the local culture. Thus, in black and Latino communities, the charter community forms a bulwark against the local culture of drugs, crime, gangs, functionally parentless households, promiscuity, unwed teenage parenting, disrespect of authority, and the ridicule of academics – and not just a bulwark, but creates positively a replacement culture standing for the exact reverse of the surrounding local culture. While not a “religious” agenda or curriculum per se, it is nevertheless a school environment drenched in civic virtue and what used to be referred to in public schools as common everyday (human, “secular”) virtue: honesty, integrity, personal responsibility, a rigorous work ethic, compassion for neighbor, participation in the wider community (country), fortitude, and much more. Indirectly, these school environments often integrate into those settings the values of the families which compose them, which include Catholic Latinos and Black Baptists (for example). I assure you that (unlike neighborhood site schools), no student is getting condoms at the office. And the much longer and much more serious school day makes it possible for students to maintain achievement and personal growth in virtue outside of most family settings which do not mirror those settings.

Not all charters run equally well, but of the many I have seen and taught in, the only ones which do not run well are those not professionally managed (such as the uneducated leading the uneducated).

American Muslims have similarly vouchered themselves, as communities, to create environments which serve the dual purpose of language needs (from a variety of household languages) for an English curriculum, plus a school culture which resists and protects from the early sexualization of females in contemporary America. These schools mandate not just uniforms but modesty, the absence of ‘rap’ and other female-degrading music on campus; prohbit profanity, and enforce respect for authority. Just understand that when such charters for Muslim communities are formed, the school year is constructed with the Muslim holidays and the Muslim week as the priority; thus, school ends at noon on Friday, etc. And yes, folks, this is all public money. I have taught in these schools.

Now, if Catholics were really smart , they would form similar public charters in which the Holy Days were sort of cleverly worked into the calendar just as Muslim charters have done for their own religious holidays, with public money. Not to mention having control over the curriculum, which is standard also for other charters.

Think about it, guys. So far, all Catholics have done – as a protest and as a practical solution-- is homeschooled. There’s nothing wrong with that (I love homeschooling, and have done it professionally), but you pay out of pocket for that. You can voucher yourselves as communties and get a Catholic education with public money. It’s time to oppose the Soviet-style morally arid control over our country’s children which is represented by modern American schooling.

Organize.

You’re right on two counts. Catholics are not the only ones who are concerned about the immorality taught and tolerated in public schools in the name of freedom. Muslims, many Protestants, Orthodox Jews and even some atheists and agnostics are too.

Second, there are are religious charter schools that operate with tax dollars. I know of two Catholic charter schools. This is allowed by the law. The problem is getting the charter is not easy.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[Elizabeth502]

I know of two Catholic charter schools. This is allowed by the law. The problem is getting the charter is not easy.

The “not easy” part is relative to a variety of factors, including the State in which the charter is being sought, the terms of the charter, the competencies of those seeking the charter, and much else. Some charter efforts are far easier than others. The Muslim charter in which I have taught was an example of an easy project and relatively easy renewal. (Other charters have been easy to start, but difficult to renew.)

IOW, the religious overtones of the community seeking the charter is not what makes the effort supposedly “difficult,” nor does a lack of religious orientation make another effort “easy.” It’s more complex than that.

 

[manualman]

Charter schools are NOT the answer, at least not in Illinois. Here, charter schools receive the same ACLUish scrutiny that all other public schools do to make sure nobody is teaching faith with “public money” (otherwise known as my tax dollars).

Catholic education, done right, casts light on the way that our faith has shaped EVERY aspect of western civilization: history, sociology, art, literature, music, you name it, Christ is and has been in it. I won’t settle for having to keep discussions of faith out of every subject EXCEPT religion class. Too many catholic schools are already that way and that trend needs reversing ASAP.

As I said before, a values-free education is an oxymoron. If you attempt it, then what you are really giving is an indoctrination into moral relativism and ‘de facto’ atheism.

 

[Elizabeth502]

Charter schools are NOT the answer

I’m sorry but they are a way better answer than the current hemorraghing of a Catholic site school presence throughout most of the nation. You need to check out the news on this, in case you haven’t. Traditional Catholic schools have been dealt a kidney punch, in terms of numbers alone. Secondarily, due to the perceived “need” to appeal to secularists and to families of other faiths (seeking alternatives to publics), their core identity has in many cases been shaken, in terms of curriculum, instruction, and mission. (That is, the latter has become the survival strategy to just “stay alive” fiscally.)

Also, if you had read my post carefully, you would have seen me make the distinction “depending on the State.” I wasn’t speaking of Illinois per se. I’m not an expert on Illinois. I am, however, well acquainted with charter movements in some other States, and the reasons for the success of those elsewhere. Depends on the culture of the State, the perceived desperation of the public offices of Education, the personnel approving those charters, the strategizing of those pursuing the Charter, and other factors.

The (current) attrition rate of private Catholic schools is NOT the answer. There’s plenty of blame to go around where that attrition is concerned, but one of the principal factors is the de-commitment of religious orders to Catholic school instruction, and the movement in the last 30 years away from religious communities to consecrated “independents,” including members of Orders specifically oriented, historically, to kindergarten-through-college Catholic education. (I’m speaking now of women’s orders, largely.)

Ultimately, charter Catholic schools are second-best to traditional, private Catholic schools, but i.m.o. they represent a better way to salvage (temporarily) the Catholic culture in a community setting than the Catholic school desert many locations are now faced with.

As I said before, a values-free education is an oxymoron. If you attempt it, then what you are really giving is an indoctrination into moral relativism and ‘de facto’ atheism.

And that’s precisely what students are receiving in non-Catholic traditional site schools presently. However, Muslim children are getting, in their charter schools, some values education more closely aligned with the values of Islam than they would receive in any public, non-charter site school. That’s because frankly they’re being far more realistic with the avenues open to them than die-hard traditionalist Catholics who want to rely on private Catholic site schools which have disappeared.

I will bet you that if a Foundress appeared with an exclusive mission to K-12 education, and announced that after Mass from the pulpit, including a collection for that purpose, she would see significant contributions pour in. Catholics, including those of us who are traditionalists (like me), are hungering for the resurrection of tradiitional, authentic Catholic schooling. Currently, however, there is not sufficient Catholic personnel to staff those schools in the very locations where there is demand, nor is there sufficient operations funding for them.

 

[mkarzon]

cnsnews.com/news/article/pa-bishop-does-not-recant-saying-hitler-and-mussolini-would-love-our-public-school

I’m surprised the Bishop wasn’t referred to as an anti-semite (a term which has now reached “joke” status, IMHO).

My favorite quote is “The Holocause was a unique experience”.

Well, it wasn’t as unique to nailing God to a cross outside Jerusalem around 2000 years ago, again IMHO.

 

[ricks1948]

He also was talking about choice. And I agree I sent my daughter to Catholic school (Kindergarden thru 8th grade) When it came time for HS I could not afford it, and I still pay the same amount of property tax as anyone else.

 

[Luna_Lovecraft]

When you resort to bringing up Hitler in an argument, you’re done.

Luna

 

[ricks1948]

When you resort to bringing up Hitler in an argument, you’re done.

Luna when you ignore history your in danger of repeating it.

 

[incense]

Strange that mentioning Hitler and Mussolini made them think he was referring to the Holocaust.

I didn’t think Mussolini was involved in the Holocaust, so I looked it up. He wasn’t. He did put them in detainment camps, but Jews from Germany actually fled to Italy where they felt safer. It wasn’t until Mussolini was killed that Hitler sent his troops in and started killing the Jews.

So obviously the press was just trying to use the power of the press to smear him. Didn’t Mother Angelica call that white martyrdom?