Opinion piece from the WSJ, written by Anthony Hardy Williams, democratic candidate for governor.  I found this to be highly unusual for a democrat in PA to be advocating against the official platform of the PSEA.  I don't normally vote for a dem, but his position has me sitting up and taking notice.  I especially like his stance that if you can take your dollars to pay for Charter Schools, why shouldn't you be able to do the same for other private schools?  Charter's have been getting an unfair advantage and it's time for that to end.

"Under President Obama's new $4.35 billion Race to the Top program, states can compete for funds by creating programs that improve the quality of their schools. The idea of rewarding school reform initiatives is good, but one-time grants from the federal government will not improve our public education system by itself.

Why? Because the $400 million grant Pennsylvania now seeks represents less than half of 1% of the $23 billion spent annually in my state's public school system. Given the thousands of dollars already being spent per student, an additional $56 per child will be insignificant—unless it is accompanied by comprehensive school-choice reform.

Pennsylvania should adopt reform based on the same premise as the Race to the Top initiative: that competition for taxpayer dollars improves the quality of education.

School choice means supporting the full menu of educational options, including public schools, charter schools, magnet schools, private schools, and vocational schools, just to name a few. Parents should have the right to choose which school is best for their children. The money should follow the child.

Competition improves quality in every industry, including the field of education. Just as Race to the Top encourages competition, school choice in Pennsylvania would allow thousands of schools to compete for a piece of the $23 billion spent annually on our public schools. It will spur innovation and improve schools across the state.

In the 2002 case Zelman v. Simmons-Harris, the Supreme Court ruled that school-choice programs are constitutional and do not violate the establishment clause of the constitution. The Zelman decision has the potential to fulfill the promise of Brown v. the Board of Education and bring true equality to education. But to fulfill that promise we must adopt a competitive framework.

Defenders of the status quo, including the teachers union, argue that the problem, particularly in our inner-city public schools, isn't lack of competition but lack of adequate funding. This is a myth.

Consider the facts in Pennsylvania: The Pittsburgh School District's $19,882 per student ranks at No. 13 in spending among our 501 school districts. The Harrisburg City School District's per student spending of $16,297 ranks at No. 37. The Philadelphia School District's May 2009 budget proposed total spending of $3.186 billion to educate 193,536 students—an average of $16,462 per student. What's more, these spending figures include lower-cost programs such as charter schools, adult education and pre-kindergarten, so it's conceivable that traditional K-12 public schools in these districts spend even more per pupil than we know. Yet these city districts still experience significant achievement gaps compared to many other districts in the state.

If a charter school or a private school spending between $16,000 and $20,000 per student doesn't produce positive results, parents will withdraw their children from the school and the school will—deservedly—fail. But parents don't have the option of withdrawing their children from a failing public school. Today's system permits failing schools to continue, penalizing less fortunate children who only get one chance for an education.

I was lucky. My mother was so frustrated by the unsafe neighborhoods I had to travel through to get to school, and the lack of stimulation once I was there, that she got a scholarship for me to attend a private school.

But it shouldn't depend on luck. As an African-American legislator, I've seen children in inner-city schools trapped, and I've seen kids in rural areas with no choice but to stay in underperforming schools. Changing the status quo is a big reason why I'm running for governor.

My mom was also a public school teacher, so make no mistake, I know how hard they work. At the same time, schools must also be able to terminate, not just reassign, poor performing teachers. And when we empower parents to choose the school that's best for their children, it serves as a constant audit of a school's quality because parents are able to leave bad schools and enroll their children in better performing schools.

I hope that Pennsylvania receives a Race to the Top grant. But unless we're willing to fundamentally change the system, the money's impact will be minimal. Children in our state can't wait any longer: Now is the time for school choice.

Mr. Williams is a state senator from Pennsylvania and a candidate in the May 18 Democratic primary for governor."

amused2 on:5/13/2010 8:55:34 AM

Reply To Note
	8	13	5

Why are you making the assumption that choice only relates to charter or private schools?  How about other publics?  Why can't one of our students go to Kutztown if their choice of programs is a better fit for them?  The point is that the money should follow the student and if your own district cannot successfully create a positive and successful learning environment, then perhaps it should be shut down.  Parents/students should not be held hostage to a particular school district due to their address. 

You responded as expected Marty.  It's time to think outside of the box.

amused2 on:5/14/2010 8:47:35 AM

Reply To Note
	13	11	6

Martin Handler spoken like true public school advocate. Lets get off the charter school issue we have heard your dislike of them more them a few times.

When will the public school system stop pretending it is not more money that they need to produce better students. All we here from the so called educators is give me more money and I will give you better educated students. Bah Humbug you and all your lackeys have given us that story before and it is time for the Right Change!!!

Me thinks the real story is you are afraid of being held accountable for a bad job. Something many of us that pay your high salary have to deal with all the time in the private sector. “Accountability”

 Opps in the public school system as we know it that will never happen!

Then again you will be pulling a handsome retirement from two areas. All on the taxpayers dime now won’t you.

ShamWoW... on:5/18/2010 10:55:36 PM

Reply To Note
	8	9	5

hehehehe...

ShamWoW on:5/19/2010 9:10:05 PM

Reply To Note
	6	5	3

Actually we have two seniors that have been accepted at Columbia among other top schools. Not bad for a little country school.

Anonymous_700440540254 on:5/20/2010 6:07:55 PM

Reply To Note
	5	6	1

I'm not a counselor, but my son is friends with several seniors. Not only Colunbia for this class, but Franklin & Marshall, RIT, Bucknell, NYU, Duke, Gettysburg, and one young man who wants to be a doctor got into a program for early acceptance into a medical school in Philly. Stop knocking little ole Brandywine. The opportunity is there, it's just the student and parent's responsibility to make sure they take advantage of it. Let's not start to take a step back, though, with academics, solely in the name of the almighty dollar. Way to go Class of 2010!

Jr parent on:5/20/2010 11:42:49 PM

Reply To Note
	8	6	3

Well said! And exactly right on target!!!

Anonymous_20501880117017 on:5/24/2010 6:27:00 AM

Reply To Note
	9	1	0

I agree, and really it is the job of the colleges to prepare the students for their work after graduation, it is the job of Brandywine to prepare the students for college. For those not attending college, the county has training programs for vocational work upon graduation from High School.

a citizen on:5/24/2010 10:27:37 AM

Reply To Note
	5	6	3