Santorum: Parents should run schools

[ajb]

Dude, he's not talking about eliminating public education.  Did you even read your article?

Santorum: "Local communities and parents should be the ones who are in control of public education"

...

You must be logged in to read this quote.

now, I think that's a severe overstep for a president to do.  Let the states do what they want to do, and don't throw away the 10th Amendment.  But he's not saying everybody should be homeschooled.

What I don't get here is why state governments are the villains in all of this. Given that kids can't choose their parents, or their school districts, it would be nice if somebody was trying to ensure consistently high standards, no?

[ajb]

Dude, he's not talking about eliminating public education.  Did you even read your article?

Santorum: "Local communities and parents should be the ones who are in control of public education"

...

You must be logged in to read this quote.

now, I think that's a severe overstep for a president to do.  Let the states do what they want to do, and don't throw away the 10th Amendment.  But he's not saying everybody should be homeschooled.

What I don't get here is why state governments are the villains in all of this. Given that kids can't choose their parents, or their school districts, it would be nice if somebody was trying to ensure consistently high standards, no?

At times, state regulations can be bad for the system.  A guy in Lansing often doesn't know how to fix a broken system in Detroit.  That being said, at least the guy in Lansing recognizes that the system in Detroit needs fixing.  You need central structure to ensure that things are running smoothly everywhere, but when it comes time to fix things, the best way to fix it is usually at the local level, rather than from that centralized system.

I'll buy that. But there are good reasons for doing some things, like setting curriculum at the state or (dare I say it...) at the national level.

When conservatives start talking about devolving more school control to local levels, I worry about two things:

1) erosion of curricular standards under parental pressure (I'd include under here, for example, some communities changing the way they teach science or history to suit local political or religious agendas)
2) making sure that rich suburbs get to spend more money on schools, and don't have to help subsidize poorer districts.

I get why parents want the best for their kids, and want their local schools to get their tax money, but consistently good public schools are one of the best long-term engines for economic growth.

[ajb]

Dude, he's not talking about eliminating public education.  Did you even read your article?

Santorum: "Local communities and parents should be the ones who are in control of public education"

...

You must be logged in to read this quote.

now, I think that's a severe overstep for a president to do.  Let the states do what they want to do, and don't throw away the 10th Amendment.  But he's not saying everybody should be homeschooled.

What I don't get here is why state governments are the villains in all of this. Given that kids can't choose their parents, or their school districts, it would be nice if somebody was trying to ensure consistently high standards, no?

This presupposes that the consensus of parents active in their local school district aren't interested in "high standards."

Actually, mine is the position that presupposes nothing about what parents will be interested in.  I do think that if you have local control over curricula, you'll get some places where parents demand, and get, a rigorous and comprehensive curriculum. You'll have other places where graduation standards, perhaps, get relaxed, so that everyone looks good. You'll have still other places where local school boards get co-opted by a tiny minority of parents who manage to impose their own political or religious views on their children's schools (and, to be sure, some places where those parents do represent the majority).