Around the state, the races are heating up and people are pulling out everything to win their race. According to the Maneater:

Ed Robb, the Republican incumbent running in the 24th House District, said it is the state's role to provide students with a quality education, and drew criticism from Democrats at the event when he said he would support a scholarship that allows students in failing schools to attend private school.
"We need to offer the parents another option," Robb said.

Opponents say “vouchers” are not good because it takes money away from the public schools. Herein is where the problem lies. Robb, or others in support of educational choices in Missouri, are not and have not been promoting vouchers, which are unconstitutional in Missouri. They are supporting scholarships. In the past several legislative sessions, these scholarships discussed would be funded by private or corporate donations. These people/corporations would then get tax credits. However, when the child uses the scholarships to attend a different school, be it private or public, it does not take money away from the original school of attendance. It is new money added to the pot…how can people have a problem with that?!
There is something disturbing by people using the same “voucher” fear-creating word to deter people from the idea. Everyone wants improvements, right?

Teachers Union Supporting Gay Rights?

Teachers unions have been strong fighters for goals they represent. They have millions of members, millions of dollars, and millions of believers. Recently, the California Teachers Association donated $1 million last week to help defeat a ballot initiative which would ban same-sex marriage. They claim it is a civil rights issue and feel others should not be treated differently. To be clear, I am not taking a stance on this issue…I don’t even live in California.
According to the LA Times:
"I think the California Teachers Assn. is well-known to be a political group, and it's not the first time it has not represented the true voice of its members," said Sonja Eddings Brown, spokeswoman for Protect Marriage California, the measure's backer. She said she agreed that the issue is civil rights -- not those of gay couples, but rather those of children to be raised by a mother and a father.
Parents in states where gay marriage is legal were angered when gay marriage was taught in school, and they could not pull their children out of those lessons.
My question…. teachers unions claim to be protecting themselves as teachers, right? Some even claim they are working together for the students. How does working for gay marriage do either one of these? Now this brings me to my point, the unions are obviously not working for the children and I think that is an important message to parents, students, politicians, and citizens. Many people will buy into whatever propaganda the teachers unions are putting out there. It is no wonder the unions are always the main frontrunners of those fighting against school choice or other education reforms. Are they really doing this for the kids? Doubtful! It is clearly a self-serving act...or possibly a position all teachers represented do not agree with.

Did You Know?

This morning I came across a rather well-produced video that considers the changes that have occurred in the past few centuries regarding the growth of the number of words in the English language. It presents statistics regarding technological advances and population growth. Changing careers, economics, education, and more are packed into about a minute that leaves one drop-jawed with wonder, if not also dizzy with vertigo. The video is entitled Did You Know? and ends asking the viewer "So What Does It All Mean?"

Check out the video. What does this mean to education? Should we not be changing the way we educate in a way that relates to the world around us?

Get Out of the Political Gutter

How far will we let failing schools lurk in the gutter with our children before we reach in and pull them out? In both Saint Louis and Kansas City, charter schools have proven to be a lifeline for those children sinking in the mire created by irresponsible educators and politicians. Unfortunately some politicians are out to cut even this lifeline.

Sometimes it's the Republicans, this time it's the Democrats. Claiming Replubican gubernatorial candidate Kenny Hulshof has "traded the future of Missouri kids in urban public schools for $100,000 in campaign cash from a special-interest front group," Democratic party spokesman Zac Wright, along with the Nixon campaign, tried to shift the focus of this important election from things that really matter, like what we are going to do to create a better education system for our children in this state, to things like campaign contributions.

Let's face it: Both campaigns have a lot of money. Nixon is ahead in the polls and has received huge donations from attorneys and the teachers' unions. Hulshof received a large donation from entrepreneur Rex Sinquefield. OK. We know now.

So back to the things that matter. Last week, Hulshof laid out a specific 5-point plan, giving more choice to parents in where to send their child to school by encouraging the formation of more charter schools. It would also allow for the creation of a fund to which citizens could donate and receive a tax credit. The money would create scholarships for city children whose families can't afford to send them to private schools the option to do just that.

These sound like good things to me. Nixon's only response was that he has the support of school adminstrators. Where is his plan? Would it work?

Get out of the gutter.