Parents must have a voice in public education

Dear Davis County Parents,

Is opposition to Parents for Choice in Education (vouchers), based on a real concern for our children, or a concern that with choice, parents might expect more? I spoke with a mother this week whose daughter had previously suffered from an eating disorder and now in high school was struggling with this terrible affliction again. The mother believes that, among other things, a change in high schools will be critical to her recovery. Her variance request was denied. Armed with letters from two doctors, the mother appealed. It was denied. The desperate mother then appealed to the district Director of Admission who told her there is nothing he could do. When she reminded him there was plenty of room at the other high school he replied “it is not about capacity, it’s about teachers and things you don’t understand”.

What does the district value over the health of a child? When the SL Tribune asked the District about the variance policy that had been used to deny the Haycock’s 9^th grader from attending the same high school as his older sister, District spokesman, Chris Williams said “the district needs to limit transfers so programs aren't harmed by a student exodus.” (See SL Tribune Mar. 7). I thought our public schools were for the benefit of our children, but Mr. Williams tells us that our children are for the benefit of their programs.

When our school administrators are so paranoid of what parents might do if they could choose, their fear of vouchers should not come as a surprise. Last week DEA President Susan Firmage sent an email inviting school employees to an anti-voucher meeting at Davis High, Thursday March 8^th at 4:00 p.m. In the email she stated that Superintendent Bowles had sent an email requesting that all the Principals attend or send a representative from their administration. At the meeting Dr. Bowles, flanked by Board President Storey and Board Member Bain, instructed them about what role they could play in the petition drive against Parents for Choice in Education. Given that he is the CEO of a $470,000,000 education enterprise and the Board President was standing with him, would you feel strong armed into supporting his plan? If you would, the message was is clear, marshal your resources to prevent choice from ruining a perfectly good monopoly.

How can an administration this afraid of competition ever rise to the challenge of preparing our children to compete in the global economy? Last week the U.S. Chamber of Commerce issued a report on whether we are preparing our children to compete in a global economy, they gave Utah a “C” in “Academic Achievement” and “Rigor of Academic Standards” and a “D” in “Truth in advertising about student proficiency” (see Deseret News, Mar 1). Nationally, federal studies concluded that 40% of high school seniors failed to perform at the basic level on a national math test and half of 12th-graders couldn’t demonstrate basic science skills (see Deseret News, Mar. 8). Maybe market influences can help create the change necessary to meet the global challenge.

As a public school parent who never intends to use a voucher, I am convinced that vouchers will strengthen and not harm public education even though it may threaten the status quo. The voucher is far less expensive than the full cost to educate a child, therefore there will be more money available for the children that remain in the system. More importantly, if administrators knew that parents have a real choice, they might be more interested in the will of the parents and more likely to respond to the changing world and changing needs of education.

Please see the article, “Say no to the referendum” and DO NOT SIGN AWAY YOUR RIGHT TO CHOOSE.

Randy Smith

Spokesman, DavisParents.org

“Because public schools belong to the public”