While there is some room for those who would challenge my claim, my response is "prove me wrong".
Frequent readers of my blog would know that I have written several times about how the public education system sets up practices that may come back to bite them in the ass ("free" busing", "free" breakfast). These same frequent readers would know that I submit that the public is blamed for not being independent whenever the public school system cuts the service that was the initial step in creating the public dependency. How many parents succumb to the "if it's free it's for me" mindset when "everyone does it", such as "free busing" and "free breakfast"?
While I was perusing my blog and other local education blogs, I fell on this early post that I made as "anonymous".
For those who care, I learned a long time ago that if my real name of Richard L. Hancock was attached to something, my "concerns" were discounted because I was known as a "malcontent", an "isolated incident" attacker-by-the-hundreds(?) or a "broad brush attacker" against the HCPS (from Earl himself).
For what it is worth, here is a comment I made a long time ago on April Griffin's blog:
"
Anonymous said...
Within any system, with increasing numbers of units involved, logistic strategies must change to adapt.
If the District wants to enforce the State guidelines then stick with this as the focus of the debate. When exceptions are made, they must be made on reliable data, not personal whims from either side. The data should be solid enough to withstand scrutiny.
Leadership must rise above the rest if they want to be credible. When District personnel use ad hominem stategies to boister their position it sets the arena for the debate and we end of with distorted rationalizations from both sides. The result of these ill conceived tangents continues the degradation and gives credence to those who see a lack of competent leadership.
August 12, 2007 10:27 AM "
************
I think I an right again about my perception of "the system".
I wrote my above comment a year ago.
For those who are challenged with the concept, just think about the fact that the "state guideline" of busing was ignored by the district for many years. Now, the district wants to enforce it.
What is to be expected?
For advanced thinkers, this is the same problem that exists with how the system deals with behavior.
When the hammer "really" comes down, the fact that the "hammer was never used for (days, weeks, months, years), the resulting "fit of the student(parent)" is more about the "hypocrisy" than it is about the "rule".
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
2 comments:
"These same frequent readers would know that I submit that the public is blamed for not being independent whenever the public school system cuts the service that was the initial step in creating the public dependency."
Richard, I have commented on this before. I don't see how free bus service benefits the school system. Just look at the headache this is causing today. I think they would love to do away with buses. Same with the free breakfast.
My mom always had a breakfast for us even if it was "instant breakfast". Why should the school system feed kids a meal at the start of the day.
Isn't that what parents are for?
I feel like so many in our society are unwilling to take responsibility for what is their problem.
The school system didn't create a dependency to ensnare poor unsuspecting parents.
The Federal Courts mandated large scale busing. The school system, run by elected officials, began transporting kids for free. I'll bet it was a popular idea at the time and politicians jump all over popular ideas.
The suggestion that there exists some conspiracy to make parents dependent on buses and free lunches sounds like a bit convoluted.
Your child benefited (despite your frequent and justified complaints) from "free" services that were mandated by the courts. Were YOU made dependent? Was there some conspiracy to suck your in?
Richard, your blog is one of the best out here. Keep up the great work!!
Thomas, thanks for the reply.
I want to separate two issues we can discuss.
The issue of "big government" and "socialized dependence" requires a very large scope of understanding of the myriad of forces that political and business factions struggle with through time.
This is one place to start:
Education & the Workforce".
You are correct when you mention that "politicians jump all over "free services".
I am not suggesting a "conspiracy", rather a political ideology. This discussion is more global in context.
It should be noted that there is a wide held belief that "special education" students "take money away regular education students".
Is this mindset because special education students were late to the trough, they suck hind tit?
Do black kids (Brown vs. Board of Education of Topeka)"take money away" from white kids?
************
The other issue is more local in context. When our local education agency (LEA) picks and chooses which state statutes they want to enforce, this action creates an environment for discord between the public and the LEA.
For example, as a parent of a disabled student, I could provide an almost endless number of incidents of how the LEA picks and chooses compliance issues with IDEA and state stautues. For the purpose of our current discussion, I will stick with "free transportation" and "free breakfast".
The LEA has chosen to provide "courtesy busing" for years. Why? How did that happen?
Were parents marching in the streets demanding courtesy busing before it was provided?
When the LEA decided to provide courtesy busing, did they loudly proclaim that this was a "courtesy" service and that the public was not "entitled" to it?
Have there been disclaimers that state that the LEA can refuse to provide courtesy busing? Did the LEA make it known that they were spending more money on transportation than they were supposed to when they (LEA) complained about lack of money?
Was providing courtesy busing a sound financial practice? If not, then why did it happen?
As far as "free breakfast" goes, here is an example of how a school system promotes the practice:
"Research shows that behavioral, emotional and academic problems are more prevalent among children who are hungry," said state Education Commissioner Jeanine Blomberg. "Academic performance and readiness is enhanced when students start their day with a nutritious meal."
Blomberg is pushing for more Florida kids to eat breakfast at school. Right now about 488,000 do, but that's less than one out of five.
Orlando Sentinel - Breakfast at school? by
So when this school system can no longer afford the cost, what will happen?
Is this "free service" a feather in the political cap of the Education Commissioner?
Are parents marching in the streets demanding free breakfast?
Post a Comment