Author: Emily Iles

On Monday, March 2nd, 2009, legislators and citizens gathered for a press conference held by Missouri Senator Jim Lembke to discuss his new bill to lift the deed restriction that restrict Charter schools from purchasing abandoned St. Louis public schools.
 
The press conference took place at vacant Scullin Elementary School, across the street from City Academy, a private school opened in 2005.  This corner illustrates the problem posed by deed restrictions that do not allow private, parochial or Charter schools to purchase and reuse these buildings as educational entities.  
 
Scullin Elementary school was built in 1908, and is still a beautiful building with a marble staircase and new playground equipment, though paint is chipping off the windows. As the press conference was being set up, a maintenance worker was fixing the boarded-up front door; according to him, they had had break-ins recently.
 
Senator Lembke, Senator Jeff Smith, Representative T.D. El-Amin, Senator Jane Cunningham and Representative Tishaura Jones spoke of concerns about crime, property values, about the dozens on public schools on the market, and the communities that were once anchored by them.
 
Lembke’s bill hopes to fix a number of problems.  First, these buildings were paid for by taxpayers for the purpose of educating children.  Prohibiting them from continued use as school buildings is contrary to the designation of those tax dollars.  St. Louis Public Schools will additionally face a $35 million budget shortfall this year, and many communities and taxpayers are wondering why the Special Administrative Board would cling obstinately to restrict sale to the most likely buyers of these vacant buildings—charter schools.  The number of closed school buildings in St. Louis is expected to add 17 more buildings this year to the 22 schools already closed and sitting empty.  
 
The second concern is for neighborhoods.  An empty school building does nothing to improve a neighborhood, but it can do a lot to tear it down.  For neighborhoods already struggling, an empty building brings more potential for crime and vandalism.  It brings dangerous conditions as the building falls into disrepair.  It can drastically devalue nearby homes. But most importantly, it leaves a hole in the community.

Author: Sarah Riordan

Despite the opening scene of Mean Girls  in which homeschoolers are viewed as gun-toting, spelling bee-winning, backwards members of society, many are pretty normal and dedicated to education. 

Perhaps Senator David Vitter has seen the positive side of homeschooling, and that’s why he is out to give homeschooling families a little financial break. 

The word “little” above does in fact, as it usually does, mean little.  Basically, Vitter’s S.100 gives homeschooling families 500 dollars per child tax deduction for eligible homeschooling expenses maxing out at 2,000 dollars.  So if you have over four children, you have to get rid of the rest.  Or perhaps just let them learn to read on their own.

On a more serious note, Vitter is actually trying to be fair to families who do not choose to send their children to taxpayer-funded public schools.  Vitter probably sees that plenty of families out there are paying for everyone else’s education, but no one is aiding them in paying for their children to learn. 

As far as expenses go, families who choose to home school or send their children to public schools, are forking out quite a bit in taxes to support public education.  Private schools charge thousands of dollars a year and homeschoolers are hit because they have to pay for their own textbooks.  If any of you out there are in, or have children in college, you know how expensive textbooks are.  Vitter is trying to give homeschoolers a rare break in the world of government tax policies.

So, Vitter’s reasoning is quite…reasonable.  However, the whole issue does raise the question, “Should people who choose a different path for their children’s education be eligible for tax breaks?” Personally, I am not opposed to homeschooling and would fully support any family who chooses to do so.  However, the point is that no where are American citizens guaranteed a tax break for making a choice.  As a society, we opted to use tax dollars for a publicly funded school system.  As a result, part of being an American citizen means that some of your money will go to providing the greater population with an education.  If you choose another way that’s your choice but people shouldn’t expect special concessions.

Author: Sara Hilbert

Educational inequity is our nation’s greatest injustice. The National Assessment of educational Progress in 2005 found that fourth graders growing up in low-income communities are already three grade levels behind their peers in high-income communities. Even though we all have the same potential to achieve, there are extra challenges these children face, in addition to the growing polarization of social classes. Most of all the schools lack sufficient capacity to meet these extra needs; especially lacking in teachers and leaders who deeply believe their students can achieve at high levels.

Last month Hilary Clinton sponsored the “National Principal Recruitment Act”. This will recruit, train, and support principals for high-need schools who are effective in improving student academic achievement. Clinton’s act aims to create and maintain data-driven, professional learning communities within the new principal’s school. This program will engage the community, involve parents, and leverage addition resources to improve student academic achievement. These schools will have three focuses: teaching and learning, school culture, and management and operations. The real difference that sets this aside is the matching requirement. To receive a grant there has to be an eligible grantee shall contribute to the activities assisted under such grant matching funds in an amount equal to not less than 100 percent of the amount of the grant.

This strategic move will challenge principals to become solid leaders. It also sets them up to have the resources and support to create a successful school environment and focus on outstanding performance from their students. This plan recognizes there are factors greater than the teacher data and student test results that effect performance. This plan will research and analyze both internal and external factors in the particular school and then find solutions to offer the very best way to serve these children.

With nearly 40% of our nation’s principles nearing retirement, our cities are in need of well-prepared and highly motivated principals to lead our schools where every student can thrive and succeed. Education is, unarguably, the key to opportunity. This bill would fulfill our most fundamental obligation, we all have a role we can play to ensure every child has an equal chance.

Author: Sara Hilbert

College students are being pushed to new levels of creativity, not in their studies or community involvement, but merely for survival with the frustrating costs of textbooks. USPIRG has studied the rise of textbook costs, claiming that students spend as much as $900 a year on textbooks. In a technical field, this expense can increase by as much as double. Largely due to insufficient communication about the textbook market, publishers can get away with these rising costs. These lofty expenses result from new editions constantly produced every three and a half years, even with subjects that have not changed significantly. These same publishers also”bundle” study guides, CD-ROMs, and extra materials with a textbook that significantly increase a textbook without the option to purchase the textbook only.

To put it all in perspective, a Government Accountability Office study shows that textbook prices have been rising at double the rate of inflation over the past two decades.

The cost challenges force students to share textbooks, hunt for bargains online, set up book fairs, or, worse, do without. When given enough time, students can find the very same textbook and class material overseas for almost 90% less (Michelle Singletary Washington Post column “The Color of Money” interviewed on NPR). The only downfall with buying internationally is the longer shipping time. This option is less valuable because most colleges do not give out book lists in a reasonable time to purchase online. Worse, some college bookstores do not make the International Standard Book Number (ISBN) available, restricting students from purchasing low-cost textbooks.

You can imagine the support when Representative Julia Carson sponsored “College Textbook Affordability and Transparency Act of 2007″(HR 3512). The proposal was introduced only 3 months before Julia tragically passed away from cancer. Julia’s bill would ensure that college textbooks and supplemental materials are available and affordable. Carson hoped , and her long list of cosponsors are still pursuing, to inform students about the costs of textbooks before registering for classes in order to be aware of the full cost of higher education. This bill has three main points. First, to encourage students to purchase early and always look for used editions. Second, this bill would require universities and faculty to review materials and editions that are required, without compromising high quality course materials or purchase unnecessary editions. The third point H.R.3512 emphasizes is timeliness. Timing truly is everything; schools would be required to disclose textbook lists, costs and ISBN numbers soon enough to students to give them a fair chance at accessing textbook costs in time. Despite the fact that it may not be the most effective way of cutting down costs, the bill interestingly enough seeks to give out a full history of revisions for the college textbook and/or supplemental materials that helps explain the real difference and what will be missed between editions.

While entailing a comprehensive list of objectives, H.R.3512 marks the beginning of what should become one of the most important objectives in reforming our higher education system. It is unnecessary in its entirety to keep such a costly, unneeded structure for such necessary materials in place. 

Author: Jared Fallon

To most people’s surprise, the most recent study conducted evaluating the overall increase of higher education costs shows satisfyingly minute changes. According to the nonprofit organization College Board, for the current academic year the average list price increase for four-year colleges is less than 1 percent over inflation – one of the smallest increases seen in the college world in a long time. Additionally, the average financial aid package increased, allowing colleges greater admission rates than will most likely be seen as the financial crisis begins to surface in other parts of the economy. According to the College Board however, the situation is not nearly as optimistic for the future, based on both past costs and expected future trends…reform is needed quickly.

The College Board assumes the average tuition cost to increase by 6% annually, a figure that is notably larger than both the general inflation rate and the average increase in expected incomes. According to the same data set, the anticipated cost of attending a public college/university for four years in 2026 will cost a staggering $81,900, with private institution costs totaling around $313,800 – and keep in mind these costs only reflect college tuition and standard fees. These estimates do not include other significant costs of attending a higher learning institution, such as room and board, books, and transportation. The increasing costs of the already colossal investment of acquiring a bachelor’s degree is intensified when considering that according to the USA Today 52% of college students take 5 years to earn their degrees.

Some of the pending legislation awaiting actions beyond their respective committee statuses aim to reduce the overall costs of higher education in anticipation for the shocking price increases. These increases will soon begin to hit some families beyond the current near-crisis point of nearly having to remortgage their homes. One such proposal has been introduced by Herb Kohl (D-WI) and is hoping to authorize the Education Department to match grants to high schools that establish dual enrollment programs, in the attempt to encourage students to start considering college at an earlier age and help reduce overall college costs by decreasing the amount of time it takes to earn a bachelor’s.

Another interesting proposal deals with a more systemic approach and requires less of an increase in government spending or grant/award programs. H.R.4149’s official goal is to “limit excessive fluctuations in tuition to help students and families plan for college costs.” The bill would require institutions to offer a binding, multi-year tuition and fee schedule for at least four years for the attainment of a degree. The proposal is rightly named the “Truth-in-Tuition Act of 2007” and would be enforced through amending the Higher Education Act of 1965. To discover what other reforms are on the table, follow this link and make sure your opinion is heard.

The future “war on the middle class” is going to get a lot worse if the increasing costs of education are not addressed. Reforms such as these need more dialogue if they are to have any hope of getting passed or, at the very least, inspiring other legislatures to step up to the plate and help combat the greatest outlet for opportunity that our future generations may very well be laregly excluded from. 

The bill S.3297 should go down in history books as one of the most comprehensively vague bills ever proposed. The bill’s official description alone should raise red flags around the nation: “A bill to advance America’s priorities”. The bill was first proposed by Harry Reid and currently has 7 co-sponsors, including the heavy hitters Edward Kennedy, Joseph Lieberman, and Joe Biden. The sheer amount of topics covered by this bill should be enough for months of debate on end and yet the bills progress is moving quite rapidly despite the fact that it was introduced only two months ago.

Topics covered in the staggering 400 page proposal include increased Lou Gehrig’s Disease research and funding, the establishment of national paralysis programs, increased Secretary of Health and Human Service controls for vision care for children, Homeless Youth Act reforms, increased jurisdiction for the DOJ’s authority for child pornography investigation and prosecution, the establishment of the Star-Spangled Banner and War of 1812 commemoration, amendments to the Chesapeake Bay Initiative Act of 1998 (waterway regulation), increased funding for various Appalachian regional development programs, amendments to the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, the authorization of funding over a 10-year period for “capital and prevent maintenance projects for the Washington, D.C. Metropolitan Area Transit Authority”…..the list goes ON and ON, and no bill to “Advance America’s priorities” should ever go without the establishment of a national ocean exploration and underseas research program with the NOAA. In order to truly appreciate the depth and breadth of this proposal you’ve got to see it for yourself.

Proposals like this are so power-packed with so many big supporters that one must question how many favors and friends are being satisfied in only 400 pages – these legislators truly are good friends to have. There is no implication here that any of these legislators are necessarily trying to propose all of these reforms unnoticed, but why does more transparency not exist? Chances are you’ve never heard of this proposal before reading this posting, but if you have ever heard of the Smithsonian, the Holocaust, the Great Lakes, the Department of Justice, the Star-Spangled Banner or debates on child pornography, this bill might be for you. Also, one of the upsides about this bill is if you have any other interests or hobbies not affected by the text above chances are you can find it here. Don’t take this posting’s word for it, please do check the proposal out for yourself and truly grasp the close relationship of vagueness and politics.

Missouri is only ranked 47^th in the country in regards to higher education funding; students struggle with paying alternative education loans because federal scholarships, grants, and loans do not cover the insurmountable cost of colleges and universities around the state. Graduating from the University of Missouri-Columbia in 1980, U.S. Representative Kenny Hulshof is familiar to the numerous problems within higher education programs. He wants to help fix these kinks by better equipping and supplying school administration, which will give more students the opportunity to reach higher education and, in turn, will boost Missouri’s economy as a whole.

One plan Hulshof is a part of is the establishment of the ‘Missouri Prosperity Initiative.’ It is a partnership that will strengthen programs within science and math as well as designing new programs for more efficient research. He believes that the specific branches of study that will be most effective to the state of Missouri are those in math, engineering, biotechnology, and chemistry. Better funding is an absolute necessity for students studying in these areas in order to thrive. This initiative includes higher accountability measures and increased funding for those in need of scholarships.

Hulshof also supports the ‘Lewis and Clark Discovery Initiative.’ This program has raised $335 million for Missouri’s higher education for the benefit of students without raising the state tax. He believes that through good administration and the feedback of the schools that receive this new support many goals will be accomplished; he truly understands education is something worth investing in.

Evidence of Hulshof‘s interest in education reform is enhanced by the fact that he has recently been taking the time to go to colleges and universities around the state to speak and share his visions. This month one of the colleges he visited was Hannibal La-Grange College in Hannibal, Missouri – partaking in the 150^th sesquicentennial celebration the college was holding. Hulshof was the guest speaker and shared with the students his ideas while congratulating the institution for its efforts. Hulshof stated, “I’m less concerned with what my approval rating is going to be at the end of my term, but graduation rates, how many new start-up businesses have we had, how many plant expansions have we had, how have our math scores improved, how about higher education are we making progress.” He also spoke on a more personal note, telling the audience of his childhood, and how he is the, and I quote, “black sheep” of his family by following a career in politics.

Also, although Hulshof is putting much emphasis on higher education, he has not forgotten K-12. He has in mind to hire better math and science teachers around the state as well as make it easier for a student to apply and study at technical and community colleges. He does not want someone to miss out on an education due to financial reasons. According to Hulshof, this is going to aid the economy of the entire 21^stcentury. For more information on legislative bills concerning higher education in Missouri, click here.

This moment in time has never been more fundamental for education reform. Innovative information is opening up to parents and their communities in order to compare public school rankings and overall student performances among school districts. As these changes occur, more and more failing schools are being reformed. But at what cost should the price be on change? According to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, or OECD, US citizens are paying more per student for K-12 public education than nearly all other economically advanced countries. The importance of education is indisputable. Still, we doubt increased spending because we it does not significantly improve performances of students in the American public schools system. Looking into the future, combined with the current economic downfall and the increasingly fierce international competition happening around us, it has never been as important to embrace education reforms in our collaborative efforts to create a well-educated society.

There are two pending bills that have a great impact on the interest of education; the Head Start for School Readiness Act (S.556) and SPEAK – Standards to Provide Educational Achievement for Kids Act (S.224). The first, under Chief Sponsor Edward M. Kennedy (D-MA), provides a plan to increase children’s knowledge in language, preliteracy, premathematics, emotional, and physical skills through Head Start programs. It also provides adequate training and programs to include children with limited English proficiency and those referred by child welfare services. The SPEAK Act, sponsored by Christopher J. Dodd (D-CT), is an amendment to add science to the mandatory biennial national and state academic achievement assessments. The information included on these assessments will increase content standards in mathematics and science to reflect the knowledge students need to enter college and apply in the workforce to compete in the global economy. Whereby, recent statistics have shown that the United States education significantly lags behind their industrial peers. This is more than a need to reform, this is a call for serious analysis of stagnate results, overreliance on standardized testing, and a new combination of successful programs. It is striking to see other countries like China, South Korea, and Japan score higher in education; maybe we should start taking some lessons.

While the powerful combination of these two bills using head start programs and effective goals for assessments are strong enough to move forward, it is only the beginning to a long road ahead.

AUTHOR: Crystal Fontaine

Mark Twain once said that “[m]any public-school children seem to know only two dates—1492 and 4th of July; and as a rule they don’t know what happened on either occasion”. The education of our youth should be top priority. Education paves the way for future leaders, great philosophers as well as a better world and better opportunities. It opens up pathways that many may have not known existed.

House bill number 6525 proposes to amend the National Assessment of Education Progress Authorization Act to require State academic assessments of student achievement in U.S. History and Civics.

Certain findings by Congress paint a troubling picture. The 2006 National Assessment of Educational Progress demonstrated high percentages of students scoring below basic. In the subject of history, thirty percent of students in Grade 4 scored below basic. The percentages only go higher from there as thirty-five percent in Grade 8 scored below basic, while a whopping fifty-three percent in Grade 12 has the same scores. It is interesting to note that eighty-six percent (yes, you read right) of students in Grade 12 could not explain a reason for the U.S involvement in the Korean War.

Students seemed to fair a little better concerning Civics. Only twenty-seven percent of students in Grade 4 scored below basic. Students in grades 8 and 12 show a significant difference in percentage scores between history and civics. Only thirty percent in Grade 8 and thirty-four percent in Grade 12 scored below basic. Unfortunately, seventy-two percent of students in Grade 8 could not explain the historical purpose to the Declaration of Independence. That is simply amazing. According to the bill, there should be trail State academic assessment of student achievement in U.S civics and history from grades 8 through 12 in at least ten geographically diverse states. The states would be selected and identified to participate in the assessments with the consultation of the Commissioner for Education Statistics. In addition, H.R. 6525 allows for money appropriations of $7,000,000 for each fiscal year of 2008 and 2009 in order to carry out the United States History and Civics Assessments.

Although these percentages are just numbers, they still portray a disturbing fact. For one reason or another, our students are not doing so well concerning our nation’s history. I do not think I want to know what the percentage is of students not knowing how our nation was founded.