As far as the certification and licensing of teachers go, I could honestly care less - I'm more concerned with effective end results than meaningless pieces of paper. As far as enumerated points 3-7 are concerned, I'm in total agreement.

Overall, and with a little tweaking and filling in of some details, I think that this is something that would receive strong bi-partisan support.

Tax reform could incorporate the revenue needs into a more efficient and fair structure than the one currently utilized for public education, which is why I'm all for visiting tax reform first. But then, the question of local level participation becomes an issue - would local school boards continue to be relevant / necessary? Would a centralized administration operate things more efficiently? How would the public react to a consolidation of power concerning education to the state level? Or would you continue to use separate district level boards and administrations, even though such would seem to be redundant and capable of adding very little, if anything of value other than unnecessary levels of bureaucracy?

None-the-less - not bad and I applaud the effort!

I think local control is important. With the changes to collective bargaining being new, local control is in it's infancy.

@JRH...I agree with using existing infrastructure where it is possible. Many of the larger high schools would be able to bring much of the vocational arts program into the existing facilities. The use of the technical college's facilities also make sense. But, in the rural areas, the technical colleges are either not available or to distant for easy access to students.

I personally think that we need to maintain local school boards rather than one large centralized system. Keeping it local as much as possible will provide the community the necessary input that is so highly valued.

@JRH...For someone who doesn't care whether there is a piece of paper or not and your only interested in results, you certainly have enough letters after your name. My thinking with certification is that teachers need to be certified for the subjects they are to teach. The only way to do that is with standardized certification exams.

Let me briefly address the idea of taking languages as part of the standard curriculum. With the large numbers of Latinos that are becoming part of our society, I don't think it is unreasonable that students should have a working knowledge of Spanish. The requirement for academic track students to take one year of Latin and one year of Greek will provide them with an advantage in successfully completing college and university degrees. Also, many colleges and universities have language requirements for their students. Requiring students to take 2 years of a foreign language is preparing the students for continuing on into academic post secondary programs. In all, it can't hurt.

@Lyle -

You must know by now that I've never tooted my own horn about all the letters that follow my name. In fact, the only time I ever mention it here on Patch is in response to direct questions of me concerning the matter. In all reality, I found my advanced schooling to be somewhat of a joke, especially my undergraduate degrees. To me, all a college degree proves is that a person has the resolve and dedication to accomplish what they invest their time, resources, and energy in. But I certainly don't view holding a degree as being indicative of a person possessing any kind of enhanced awareness, an elevated knowledge base, or a higher intellect than someone without such a piece of paper.

In fact, I honestly feel that our society places too much emphasis on paper over sheer effective performance. Both you and Bren were known to belittle our Governor throughout the recall process simply because of his lack of paper. But I never heard similar remarks made by recallers about William H Gates III, Steve Jobs, etc, despite them being in the same boat. In fact, some of the best performers in our society today fail to hold any kind of special paper. While most of those that caused our current problems hold an over abundance of paper. Kind of ironic, isn't it?

Einstein was right - imagine is more important than knowledge. And likewise, attitude is more important than aptitude.

BTW - I concur about the importance of local input and interaction and would want to see such integrated into any implemented educational reforms.

Mr. Hoffa, as I have stated numerous times, there are many professions where talent and experience can take the place of a degree. There are also professions, which (again) include law, accounting, medical/dental, in which specific training is required.

For me the question is this: what type of person do we want in the most important job in the state? A man with regional political experience and no college degree? Or can we do better, such as a man with national political experience (U.S. Congress), a J.D. with economics background? Given the choice I will always choose the candidate with well rounded experience. If that candidate also has superior educational credentials I consider it ideal.

The logical lesson to be learned (and therefore will be ignored) is that the American people should be pushing hard for the "best and brightest" to represent them, not "settling" for experiential and educational mediocrity.

@JRH -- We never belittled Scott Walker about his lack of paper. It was his mediocre GPA and the fact that he left only a short time prior to graduation for reasons no one really understands. Why leave almost at the end?

Bill Gates and Steve Jobs are/were legitimate geniuses. College had nothing to teach them -- at least in the areas where they made their contributions. Scott Walker might have benefited just a bit from a better study of history and philosophy. And psychology, perhaps. He could have done almost everything he has done to date if he had handled things with more finesse.

Einstein was not completely right. Imagination is important, but so is knowledge. You don't want to be reinventing the wheel every generation. The more you know, the more you can synthesize into something unique.

@JRH...Whether you admit it or not, paper has consequences. It doesn't matter to me that Governor Walker didn't complete his degree. However, what does bother me is how he has approached people of education. He has been promoting a campaign to make educated people and intellectuals scapegoats utilizing anti-intellectual resentment of a number of people.

How is paper important, it gets you through the door. From that point on it up to the individual to perform. I think, you;re full of BS or you wouldn't have all that paper yourself. Are you afraid to come out of the academic closet? I know you're no "Joe the Plumber" and the only paper he has behind him comes on a roll.

A least Joe the plumber knows what his paper is good for.
This tread really does not need this conversation to solve the problems of our education system.

So Bren, it must embarrassing that the Governor without a college degree is running the state better than the guy with the JD.

Bren said::::For me the question is this: what type of person do we want in the most important job in the state? A man with regional political experience and no college degree? Or can we do better, such as a man with national political experience (U.S. Congress), a J.D. ...

Poor Bren, she has become completely deranged by Governor Walker's victory. Bren, this thread is about how to reform education. Could you take a very cold shower or the medications that have been prescribed for you and contribute something logical?

@Greg....One of the problems I have identified with charter and voucher schools is that the variety of curriculum is the rule and with the advent of cyber schooling, it is imperative that we must test to competency. These programs have only recently been required to participate in the state testing program. After the first year the test results were disturbing as to their programs effectiveness. Currently, the public schools test all the way through and they are already providing the information for assessment. Therefore, I don't see that we need to go to the additional expense of graduation examines for public school students.

Greg, can you imagine what the results would be for MPS? Advocates for increased spending on our public school system and a reduction in the number of charter, private and online schools don't need the giant albatross of unfavorable comparable test results hanging around their collective neck.

I still don't see the difference of sending the world an idiot from a private school vs. sending the world an idiot from a public school. I think testing of only private schools may backfire, colleges and employers may look at these students as being a proven entity, where the public school student is still an unknown.

@The Anti-Alinsky...You may see that placing people into tracks based on abilities and interests is "pigeon-holing", but I see it as necessary for creating efficiencies and effectiveness in the system. I have many friends in Europe that went through the vocational arts programs that later on they enrolled into academic programs in engineering, etc and they tend to make some of the best engineers that I had a pleasure of working with. Once a student has graduated from the secondary institution and track there is nothing preventing them from participating and pursuing other disciplines.

Here's a link to the story in the Business Journal:

http://www.bizjournals.com/milwaukee/blog/2012/06/mps-thornton-students-not-interested.html

@Bob McBride...It doesn't surprise me that an MPS official would claim that people don't want to pursue vocational careers. The vocational tracks I am purposing is quite inclusive. You have to understand that the educational institutions have been pushing college preparation for nearly fifty years. They have created an environment of vocational stigma, which is just plain wrong. Why should we have to wait to train people only after they have finished or dropped out of secondary schools. If we want a viable economy and prepare for the future, we must make working with one's hands honorable. For example; how many sales representatives need a BBA in order to be effective in sales. Another example is certified structural welders. Over their working lifetimes they will earn as much or more than a 4 year degree teacher.

We currently have employment problems and part of it is that our workforce is not prepared for employment.

Then on top of poor performance, resulting in a poor return for our education dollar, you've got what apparently is a near intractable administrative behemoth that even at this late date doesn't seem to get it. Do you wonder why many people have little faith in our public school system, Lyle?

@Bob McBride...The problem we are facing is not monetary, but institutionalized thinking. The problem is not the problem but the solution is the problem. Institutional bureaucracy is the hardest to change, but change it must.

In order to change the system one has to accept that institutionalized bureaucracy has no incentive to change of it's own will and will do everything it can to resist change. So far, all we've done is change the occupant of the position of Superintendent frequently. No one has proposed a comprehensive program for eliminating that intractable bureaucratic speed bump. Each occupant of the Superintendent's position either leaves out of frustration or is essentially pushed out the door when they go native after having been in the system for awhile. It appears Thornton is moving in the later direction - if not totally there already.

Any suggestions that we change the basic structure have been met with defiance. Short of cleaning house and starting over (something that's not likely to happen), the next best thing is to attempt to create an alternative that addresses some of the issues. Perhaps the best thing to do is take the vocational aspect of it completely out of the current public education system. Move some funding to a secondary system of some sort. Granted, the reaction from the current system has been to complain about competition and lost funding rather than attempt to rise to meet it, but at the same time perhaps we'd be able to provide some meaningful vocational training to the folks we should be worrying about - the students themselves.

@Bob McBride...Amen brother!

@Tom Kamenick...Let me attempt to address some of your concerns with my thinking behind them.
1. What I want to see in certification is that the teacher has competency in the area that they will be teaching. Just because someone has a bachelors degree doesn't mean they are competent to teach mathematics, science, etc. The certification only means they are minimally qualified. It will become more important as we move to a European style education. I don't want someone teaching welding that has never held a welding torch.
3. I want to keep the schools non-profit for one important reason; to avoid what has been experienced with for profit post secondary education. The for profit system is subject to fraud and profit is the motivation for education not learning.
6. Whether you agree or not, I see public education as reserved to the secular sphere. When public funds are directed to education, it should cover the costs for a secular education. I personally like the model that the LDS Church has adopted with their seminary program. The provide voluntary religious instruction on the public school campuses and students attend the instruction before school, during lunch or immediately after school. The students don't receive educational credit for attending, but the system works well.
7. I agree that sufficient funding must be available for special needs programs. I object to Charter and Voucher schools "cherry picking" students without addressing some of the most challenging.

1 - So long as there's multiple ways of being certified besides getting a pedagological degree from a university, I'm fine with that.

3 - I think your bias is showing here. Some for-profit schools are fantastic. Some are awful. Most are in the middle. Same as public schools and non-profit private schools. Your certification and third-party accreditation requirements completely address that. This isn't at all necessary.

6 - Again here, all you're saying is you don't like religious education. Not that it runs counter to your stated goals, just that you don't like it.

7 - The case that private schools turn away disabled students has been seriously overstated in this debate. It doesn't happen nearly to the degree choice opponents claim. Much of what does occur is simply a reflection of the fact that the DPI refuses to provide the additional funding and resources to choice schools for disabled students that it provides to public schools.

7) Perhaps we need to rethink how society does special education. Maybe we should have public schools specialize in providing special needs programs and bring other students into other schools. We can provide the increased resources that are required for addressing special needs at a couple of locations rather than duplicating those same services at every school where there may be only a relatively small demand?

Wouldn't this be a way to increase efficiencies and lower costs?

6) Public education doesn't necessarily have to be secular. In reality, most of the public has a need to educate their children in religion. The requirement to separate religious instruction is nothing more than an attempt to place additional burden upon religious schools getting public funds. As long as parents are free to choose either religious or non-religious schools under the choice program, I see no conflict with schools teaching religion. Parents that don't want their kids exposed to a religion should choose a secular school.

@Tom Kamenick ... I don't think it is in the best interest of public education to introduce the profit motive into the metric. I know of and foresee too many problems with for profit schooling.

Mixing of public funding with religious education is counterproductive to a secular education. Religious instruction and training is a private matter. For more own children's religious education, we paid for it. Also, you are not of a religious minority and don't understand the difficulty of separating the dogma, doctrine and cultural norms from secular instruction for minority religious children, placing a burden on mandatory religious instruction is in direct conflict with the intent of the constitution's first amendment. You also must realize that in some areas, other than the public schools, there may only be a parochial school available as a school of choice. That is no choice if children must be subjected, involuntarily, to religious instruction.

Finally, why wouldn't we want standardized teacher certification? That represents a public guarantee and a quality control to exclude people from teaching that are either short on proper preparation or don't have the aptitude.

@CowDung...Religious instruction is the purvey of the family and is a private matter. That's why we have the establishment clause in the constitution. Public money should not be paying for religious instruction. You are obviously not a religious minority and perhaps don't fully understand the problems associated with the teaching of religious dogma and doctrine. I am not asking for religious schools to drop their teaching of religion but to advocate that parents would have the opportunity to opt out of the religious instruction. This would not put any inordinate burden on the institution and it's a quite reasonable requirement.

the other thing that people are missing is that opening up access of school choice for all is only an interim solution until we can have the reformed public schools in place and operating.

Lyle:

Government 'for the people and by the people' should be able to provide religious instruction for those that want it. No conflict with the first amendment at all--parents would have the freedom to choose between religious and secular schools as well as the freedom to choose which religious school their child attends. Being free to choose keeps clear of any violation of the Establishment clause.

Rather than certification requiremnts, we just need to give schools the authority/ability to get rid of underperforming teachers. I have known many engineers with degrees that don't seem to be able to perform at the level I would expect from an engineer. I have also known non-degreed engineers that perform at the highest levels of engineering competence.

Certifications might be nice, but I wouldn't want to eliminate teacher prospects who go into teaching later in life. Someone with work experience as a biologist, chemist, engineer, etc. can be very effective at teaching the subject matter of their career--perhaps even better than certificated teachers that don't have any actual work experience in the field, or may not be up to date on the latest research.

@Mrs R...I am well familiar with leaning theory and development. I am not advocating that children shouldn't be exposed to the fine arts, performing arts and team sports. These areas of study would be available to all students, whether they assigned one track or the other. I agree that this is very important to the education of a child.

Let's take your example of becoming an RN. Why should you have to wait to graduate from HS to enter into the medical arts. What would be wrong with those wanting to go into nursing to begin in a pre-nursing program that would specifically concentrate on the art and science courses relative to the profession. We could have a whole group of people trained when they leave HS to become home healthcare workers, extended care workers, medical assistants, dental hygienists, etc. I see this as opening more opportunities rather than limiting them.

In determining track assignment, it is not only aptitude tests, but also the student's career desires. I've worked with HS and college students for too long, non-professionally, not to have observed that we have to many students attempting to prepare and go to college that have no business being there. It's a waste of time and money. I would much rather see students going into the vocations and then decide at some time in the future that they really want to receive a college education. It means more to them and it's of greater benefit to society as a whole.

@Cow Dung -- My feeling is that religious instruction should be taught in Sunday school or Torah school or whatever. Education ABOUT religion can be taught in public school.

If you want religious indoctrination in public school you have to be aware that the government can't play favorites, and your children will be exposed to all religions, including Islam and Wicca. If you're cool with that, so be it.

Randy:

I'm not suggesting that we bring religion into public schools. My point is that we shouldn't worry about religion being in the private schools where choice parents enroll their children. The children are there because they (or more likely, their parents) choose to be there, and the choice is made with an awareness of the school's religious affiliation and religious education program.

Lyle, cowdung is correct, it is silly to think that if you are sending you child to a religious school they won't have any exposure to that particular religion, Catholic, Lutheran, Jewish, Muslim...

I will admit that you are correct that our founding fathers, in principle, did not want public monies spent on religion. However, by setting standards, and testing to see that those standards are met, I don't see a problem with a religious school teaching their beliefs and tenets along with the rest of the curriculum. The public is paying them to meet specific secular standards, the rest is extra.

The same applies to private, for profit schools. As long as they are meeting the testing standards, why can't they make a profit? Of course, I would not expect to pay any more to educate a student at a for profit school that the non-profit.

If any school does not meet the standards required, than we as taxpayer should not be expected to pay for their education.

Public funds should not be in parochial schools.
When religious schools become dependent on the state, they lose the ability to say no to the state when state authorities pass a regulation. The religious schools lose their autonomy and in doing so, they lose the ability to teach faith, and that is what makes them unique.
Teaching faith only in a religion class in a parochial school shouldn't work, because the religion of that school should be apparent in every class.

You are correct, Mrs. R. I have an online friend who teaches special ed in Scotland, who says that children's brains are not fully neuralized prior to the age of six and that attempting to force reading before that time is useless. Yet we seem to be trying to do it at ever younger ages, and I wonder if that might actually be injurious.

Skinny Dude...If you could get the KIDS to compete academically with other schools, like they do in football, you might have something going here.

Would we keep score? Or would we just give every kid a 6" participation trophy?

You don't become a plumber or electrician by graduating from high school. Just like becoming a teacher, there is an education required. A 5 year education/apprentice commitment is common. I would bet that a high school graduate would be successful in teaching an elementary school class, but none could plumb a house. Remember, the plumber's work will be required to pass, at minimum, 2 state inspections prior to his passing, I don't know of any state inspections of the 2nd grade teacher's work. A plumber or electrician may do 30 to 50 houses per year, so it can't be about class size.

According to Jim Sensenbrenner, the influx of illegal workers has caused the greatest inroads on salaries in the trades, bypassing safety and construction regulations, etc.

Not the skilled trades. Other trades such as drywall, insulation and painting.

Greg...At what point in a vocationally tracked school would you start to teach a student a trade? If you started in middle school, they could graduate from high school as journeymen, at least (that's seven years worth of training). If a student did not get the training for journeyman status, at least, you would be wasting his or her time. However, if you re- read my previous comment, you will create a whole new set of problems.

Dave, I think that the vocational arts track would be similar to the academic arts track, in that it would prepare the students for the next step. The idea that the schools could produce out of the box workplace ready skilled employees, is not realistic. The emphasis would be on exposing students to vocations and directing their base education accordingly.

Liberal arts is not useless. It probably produces the most 'educated' and versatile workers for management and HR. It also produces well-rounded citizens with an appreciation for art and literature and a basic understanding of history.

@Randy... I would not trade away my LibArts undergraduate degree for anything, as it made me 'understand before being understood'. However,I knew that i would acquire additional sheepskin with fancy writing before entering the work world. I just don't see how a LibArts degree 'produces the most 'educated' and versatile workers for management and HR', as you said.

Well, sure, Jay, if everyone is going to have a Masters at the very least just to be employed as a white collar worker.

Randy, I didn't intend to compare undergrad to masters. I was questioning your assumption that a LibArts degree generates a better performing HR person, than say, an HR degree would. Frankly, so much of HR today is technical CYA; understanding and complying with the laws to keep the government off your backside.

I can't say that I know what college degree produces the best managers,LibArts or otherwise; just that in general IT and engineering produce the worst managers.

Well, Jay, what undergraduate degree would you say is the best for someone who will be working with people?

@Jay -- I would just like to add that I spent a lot of time in the workplace editing the correspondence and other written materials of 'highly educated' bosses. At least Liberal Arts teaches you how to communicate in English properly.

Probably a good idea. Given world trends in where the jobs are and are probably going to remain, it wouldn't hurt for our exported workforce to become familiar with the local languages.

I would just point out that French is a language used in Canada, Africa, and southeast Asia, whereas Spanish/Portugese is, I believe, most useful primarily in North and South America. Knowledge of French is somewhat helpful (same root language).

Greg, children still need unstructured time to be children. Of course, that doesn't seem to exist anymore what with both parents working and the need for child-care.

The 12 month school year would mean a 220 day schedule, like our international competitors.

Randy, In the days of students having off, to work the family farm, the students considered the class time as their unstructured time. After school they went home and worked until dark and then they did homework.
The 12 month school year is just an option that should be looked at. There are benefits and times have changed. It is a radical change, but the kids still should have time to play video games.

As a side note, I recieved a lot of my education from the family farm. I got to learn lessons that were never taught in a classroom. I got to utilize many of the lessons that were taught in the classroom. The unstructured time was really never intended as such, and the net result may be that our children are not getting as much education.

@Greg...Year round school is a bit of a misnomer. In Europe they have extended periods of leave. Depending on the time of year they range from three weeks to five or six weeks. Kids school days vary from when they are young to six hours per day to children in gymnasium, eight hours a day. Usually the older students start later, around 9:00 AM.

Lyle, I am just looking at the reasons and effects related to the current school year, then applying them to a 12 month system. I think that looking at more education time, that includes more time applying the lessons to the real world, may put our students ahead.
We can learn lessons from Europe or even the Far East, but we may need to think outside the box and develop our own system.

Latin, because it's the key to French, Spanish, and many words in English. If you're going to work with words as an adult, Latin is very useful. Time was, a good classical education included some Greek too.

Although it's helpful to know how to say, "Qiero fries with that?"

I think a third track may also be necessary, something like boot-camp. We need a place for anyone that does not want to participate in the improved system.

When I was a kid, I wanted to grow up to be either a farmer or an engineer...

Had to settle for Cow Poo.

@Heather in Caledonia....I am advocating teaching two years of Spanish in primary school because of the changes in the nation's demographics. Somewhere around mid-century Latinos will be the largest minority, outnumbering whites. Being somewhat proficient in Spanish would be an advantage to all people living in the US; whether your an employer, a supervisor or an employee.

Two years of language during secondary school could go to German, Mandarin, etc.and is a definite asset. I have to admit that I'm "old school" and understand the advantage of Latin and Greek for pursuing post secondary academics. Latin is a root to Spanish, Italian, French and a great deal of English. Greek is used in almost every discipline. The schools that Horace Mann advocated were not even called high schools but were referred to as Latin Schools.

As far as for profit charter schools, once we switch over then it's going to attract every sort. For profit is fraud waiting to happen. At least with non-profits, their chief concern is for education, not making money.

Not sure that I'd agree with your opinion on profit-non-profit fraud, Lyle. Non-profits can be involved with fraud just like any other organization. The bottom line is that for-profit entities will cease to exist if they aren't doing their job and delivering what they promise. They have to produce if they want to enjoy the profit...

@Lyle -- While Hispanics may become the new majority, only a minority of them will be non-English speaking immigrants. Most of them will be born-here, English speaking Americans.

Lyle, I have to disagree with your conclusions that for profit schools will be "fraud waiting to happen". There are lots of ways for non-profits to misuse funds and ignore efficiencies. A perfect example is WEA Trust Insurance. They have been overcharging for years as a "non-profit". Here in Muskego, the school district switched over to another company and saved 2 million a year for the same coverage.

Again, as long as we don't pay more, and as long as learning standards are met, I don't have a problem with a school being for profit.

Lyle, I understand the importance of learning Spanish, but still don't see Latin or Greek as any needed foundation for someone not going into a medical or scientific field who is also learning a non-European language. Many business and arts degrees would do fine without either language. When getting a BA in Marketing and a minor in Mandarin, learning Latin would have very little significance.

Randy,
I believe you would say "Quiere papas tambien?" Quiero is the first person form (I want.)

Greg, I'm all for boot camp. There will be those who can't\won't function in either path. They can go to boot camp.

As for non-profits being all about The Children and not making money, that's ridiculous. Those people are all in it for the money - just as much as someone working for a for-profit school. Everyone needs a paycheck to buy those groceries and pay the mortgage.

@Heather -- I took French in high school (I really wish my parents had let me take Latin) so I would say, "Voulez vous les pommes frites avec ca?" My Spanish is pidgin at best.

My point is, there are other large groups of non-English speakers among the newly immigrated. If we must all learn Spanish we should also learn Mandarin, Korean, Arabic, Hmong, Russian . . .

Frankly, I'd be happy if people born here would learn to speak proper English in school.

@Daniel S. ... I don't disagree with you philosophically, but we also can't sit idly by while waiting to determine a direction. Education is an ongoing process and we have a good idea what the goal is, but means to the goal is where we differ.

Bren:

You'd rather keep children trapped in failing schools than give them an opportunity to attend private/religious schools with teachers that aren't inexperienced and incompetent?

@Bren....Remember, I'm a lefty and I am opposed to public funding to anything but public schools. I am also a realist and know that the right is going to push the voucher and charter schools and we have to be prepared to block excesses. Therefore, compromise is the best course at this time.

Let me talk about the track system as it's practiced in the developed nations in Northern Europe. The children receive a balanced education and by the time they are about age 14 they are required to take placement exams. This is when the final decision is made as to track placement. It is a balance between aptitude, personal preference, and performance. We must work to make the changes necessary to save the public school system; not as it is or was, but what it must be.

Lyle, your thoughts make sense to me. Visiting schools across Milwaukee County is an eye-opener. I agree that a balanced, uniform education is the best weapon in combating inequity and poverty, and it must be a universal commitment.

Cow, my point is about providing equal educational opportunities to children. In the area of well-rounded education that includes arts enrichment, I have seen schools where textbook pages are photocopied and shared because there's no money for books. The theater program is photocopied scripts and sparse sets. In the same year I have been to another school in the county where the theater program hires professional choreographers and directors and sets are modeled on Broadway sets. That same year, I spoke to an educator who postponed setting up a theater program at another school because the students had never been to the theater (in fact most had lived their entire lives in about a six-block radius surrounding their school and church). They just didn't understand what they were being asked to do (incidentally class time was used to educate the students about the city they were living in. The educator took them to First Stage and other programs in town, and also a bus ride downtown because none of the students had seen Lake Michigan or Bradford Beach).

So I hope you will understand my concern for equal education opportunities for children.

The voucher program in Milwaukee that competition not only increases the educational outcomes for the kids who get vouchers, it increases for the other 80% that do not. Competition is the best and fastest way to fix the public school system.

Daniel, I would be happy to not fund private schools. I just need my $3,000 back from RUSD last year for not sending my kid to a school in their system.

Heather, I'd like my $6500 back from my school district, since my son graduated back in 2001. But it doesn't work that way.

Randy, I know it doesn't work that way. That's why (as someone who has children of schooling age), I feel my money that I give to RUSD should be returned so I can use it to educate my kids in whichever school I choose. Once I don't have children in school, I would go back to giving my money into the general public school fund. Since it doesn't work that way, parents who pay to send their children to private school are paying twice - that certainly doesn't seem fair to me.

@Heather -- Why do you feel you must send your children to private school?

There is no such thing as fair. What is fair to you, is unfair to the next guy.

Randy, I will not send my children to the schools of RUSD as long as I have other options. I've complained about them and the school board before and, after the last board election, I've sworn off making any arguments on RUSD in particular. Apparently, Racine likes how the current board has done and wish them to continue.

My husband and I cannot afford a private school (we might if we didn't already pay Unified a few thousand a year), so we have enrolled our children in a public virtual school in another county in WI. We've been through 2 different schools in the past 4 years and have found one that really works for us. It's engaging, has good teachers, the staff works hard to involve families and keep kids on track, the curriculum is great and the schedules are demanding, but not unattainable. This school receives a portion of our property taxes to educate my kids, but RUSD receives the rest. I would prefer that this school receive the amount of tax money I pay towards education as they are doing the work to educate my children. We do not burden RUSD with bus service, lunches, breakfast, clothing, teacher time, building maintenance, field trip subsidies, text books, computers, etc. Yet they still receive our money... I guess it's like a gift. :)

Oh, Greg, that's silly. "I stole that guy's TV because it just wasn't fair that he should have a bigger one than I have." You're right - there's just no way to see things objectively and find that something is fair or not. It's all about our feelings. (You are a guy, right? ;) )

No, fair for me might be that you should pay for your childs education in full. If I don't have kids, is it fair that I have to pay for any education? Then if I live in a nice house I should have to pay more towards your childs education, is that fair? A bum that lives under a bridge, paid for with my taxes, pays nothing towards your kids education, is that fair?
We all would like to change the system so it favors us at all times, but that is not reality. I have no clue why you think that my comment was emotion based, when in reality it is your claim of unfair that is led by emotion, rather than fact.
To your last question, yes I am a guy. You probably don't think that is fair.

Greg, as a society, we have decided that it's in the public's best interest to educate children. If children are not educated, they end up in jail and we pay for them there. Should the government be involved in education? I think they should - for those who's parents are unable\unwilling to educate them. Is it "fair" that I pay to educate children who are not mine? I think so, but I that should happen when I'm not paying to educate my own. However, I haven't figured out how best to that - how to give vouchers to those paying rent? That would get complicated. Besides, I'm not all that interested in thinking that through because it wouldn't happen, anyway.

Your comment that nothing is ever fair sounded emotion-based to me. Is it possible to be objective and determine what is fair or not? If that's not possible, then you're basing everything on your own emotions and perceptions. Oh, and that's totally fair that you're a guy. :) It seems guys are usually the only ones who will debate me on subjects, so it's not only fair, but it's even in my favor.

Have a good day!

@Heather in Caledonia...I don't think this has anything to do with fairness, it has to do with providing for the common good. Your family has enough resources that you can send your children into an alternative program that meets your needs. However, there are the majority that don't have those resources. The purpose of this post was to not debate the need for the common good, but to reform the system so that it provides a better education and stronger community moving forward. What you are currently doing is investing in your children's future opportunities.

When I first moved to Wisconsin to take a director's position with a company in Racine, I could have lived anywhere in S.E. Wisconsin or N.W. Illinois. I had two primary school children at the time so their education was of primary importance in deciding where we would live. We looked at our options and settled on Shorewood and I commuted 28 miles each way to work. At the time Shorewood was ranked number one in public school programs, but it also had one of the highest property tax levels. In short, my children received an excellent education and prepared them to be top performers at university. We made the sacrifice and continue to pay high taxes even though our children have long graduated. I don't look at it as being fair or unfair, it is my dues to maintaining a viable society for future members. To put everything into context one must take the longer view and fully understand the benefits to be gained.

@Chris Larsen...There is room for variation.

@Kevin Presser...There are a number of things from the past that were worthwhile. Besides Latin and Greek, I would also like to see formal and informal logic as well as critical thinking taught in secondary schools. Something I am aware of is how poorly college students write and speak. There is a need for a return to a classic education for students headed onto college programs. I wasn't in a prep school fifty years ago, but I took my Latin from a small country school and it served me well.

Vocational agriculture, industrial arts, business and a number of other practical courses were taught. I had another of friends that went into union skilled trades programs and began before they finished high school. Having to go into the military interrupted a lot of our lives, but when we returned, we picked up the pieces and continued on with out lives. I got good education from my public school and I graduated from university with several degrees and high honors.

Lyle,
My children have had Latin instruction from grades 4 or 5 through grade 8. It has helped them understand how to learn language, whether that be English or Spanish. Perhaps switching Latin to younger years, then having modern languages as options in high school is something you should think about.

Kevin Presser... And those who can neither do or teach write letters like yours. You have obviously never taught or you would have more respect for the profession. It is one of the hardest you will ever be involved in. As for learning Latin, it is of immense help in building your vocabulary and giving you a framework for learning a more modern language.

I have taught, it was at the tech school level, but it was teaching. It was challenging but it was not really that hard. Many professions are hard, but the professional gets trained properly and the job becomes normal. If teaching was that hard, for you Dave, you were either unprepared or you were unfit for the job.

Me in the Falls...Good question. Go with the experts. At least they've put in considerable time studying the problems and logical outcomes. Has the school board? I doubt it. They have outside jobs requiring totally different knowledge. Their decisions tend to be political rather than scientific. They want to be re-elected, or at least not to rile up the community. The right thing to do is not always the popular thing to do. If we ran the Army the way we do the schools, we'd be in real trouble.

@Me in the Falls....The decision on which track the student is placed in is a combination of inputs. It is important to remember that there will be 8 years of data. In Europe, they don't have a graded system as the child moves through their educational years. Many have adopted pass/fail criteria. They also test at intervals through the primary and middle school years to determine subject/s competency and preparation for further learning. When they reach the end of the eighth year they are given general placement exams. Based on progress throughout primary and middle school plus placement exams is the academic input of the selection. Ideally parental input is needed all through the primary and middle school years, adding to the metric. Throughout the early education experience the teachers and parents work very closely together. Other non-measurable variables are also factored in. The final decision is made by a placement committee of secondary education experts and there is an appeals process. While in the secondary system, whether vocational tract or academic tract, there are no grades. Graduation is based on steady progress and a final set of examines for the academic tract. Vocational tract students must demonstrate the acquired skills to reach graduation.

Dave... The current education system is graduating students that can't add, much less add fractions. The trades would like the graduates to be able to at least read a tape measure.
The children that were apprenticed "in the old days" did not work the trade, they were mere labor.
As for the "Habitats for Humanity" comment, with a revised school system people will actually be getting an education, unlike now, and they will have jobs to buy their own houses.

Greg...Obviously you can't graduate anyone who hasn't learned what they need to learn, and I don't care what subject you are mentioning. There's nothing wrong with kids being "mere labor". I'm not advocating for sending them down into mines to slave, but they can help out in many small ways, appropriate to their knowledge, and strength. Kids are always looking for ways to act adult. This is a way for this to happen. Even though their job might be small, the kids should/would be made aware that people are counting on them to do their part right. They will gain respect to the extent they do this.

@Greg...I think there might be some misunderstanding of what the Vocational Arts Track entails. This tract still requires mathematics, sciences and limited liberal arts. However, there would be sub specialties within the track. Some suggestions is construction trades, machinist and tool and die, manufacturing, machine maintenance, diesel mechanics, engine mechanics, engineering technician, structural welding, urban food production, sustainable energy production and maintenance, computer technologies, computer programing, IT maintenance and management, pre-nursing, medical assistance, dental hygienist, medical home care, extended medical care, business administration, accounting, human resources, sales and marketing, market communications, etc. This is just a representation of the curriculum. The program would educate, train and apprentice students to where they could enter the work force or continue an apprenticeship program after graduation.

I think I understand your point, but unless you extend the years of schooling, you are not going to graduate electricians any more than you are going to graduate accountants, from the academic track. The beginning of this conversation was a concern by Dave, that the schools would be flooding the market and devaluing the trades. I am just trying to be realistic about the level of education that the vocational students could receive.

From above:
Dave Koven
10:45 am on Tuesday, June 12, 2012

Greg...At what point in a vocationally tracked school would you start to teach a student a trade? If you started in middle school, they could graduate from high school as journeymen, at least (that's seven years worth of training). If a student did not get the training for journeyman status, at least, you would be wasting his or her time. However, if you re- read my previous comment, you will create a whole new set of problems.

Greg
11:15 am on Tuesday, June 12, 2012

Dave, I think that the vocational arts track would be similar to the academic arts track, in that it would prepare the students for the next step. The idea that the schools could produce out of the box workplace ready skilled employees, is not realistic. The emphasis would be on exposing students to vocations and directing their base education accordingly.

@Mrs. R....I agree with you philosophically, but we are paying a heavy price for the extended dependency. Over my six plus decades, I have had three major careers and starting the fourth since I am now retired. My oldest grandchildren are going through the same issues as your grandson. There is nothing wrong with them starting out doing one thing and switching, but they need to be working and self supporting, just as you and I did.

@Lyle Ruble... You do not have all the facts re my grandson's situation and upbringing. He is in no position to make financial changes independently.
As, for me, I was raised to be in servitude and found my young self floundering ineptly to find a way through life. Circumstances are effectively uncontrollable. I had a different life as have you. It was also a different time. I supported, raised and reared four children through my journey in life and work. Please stop assuming there are equal circumstances for everyone. We all have to make choices within our individual situations. By the way, as a woman, I have had to fight and work harder than a man with the same income level.
I dare anyone to try and compare their life with mine or another individual they do not know!

My children all had jobs from the age of 12 on up. They have always worked. It was not the best! Only one, who stopped working finished her 4 yr degree.
Two dropped out altogether after 1 yr. They both have gone back, one finished her 2 yr degree and regrets not having a 4 yr degree. The next one has begun another 2 yr program that suits her life and work experiences.
The last one watch the others and opted out altogether. Who's to say who, what, when, where, or why?
The education system is going down a road of too many different threads. This diversity is clogging the topic with many ideas and we don't have time for finding a 'better' system we need to get back to the great system we had adding the extra courses for technology and creativity.

@Johnny Blade...Do you know why they are proposing dropping property taxes? They have developed other revenue sources, primarily energy resource fees, just like Alaska. Since we aren't sitting on oil, gas, tar sands, etc; what are you proposing to replace the revenue shortfall with?

They have oil and the dems said no to Taconite. So our property taxes are here to stay. Would be best if we only allowed property owners to vote.

We could export highly educated human resources, if we keep this thread on track.

@Steve....One taconite mine would not produce enough revenue. Besides, there is a willingness to revisit the mining bill and reach a bipartisan law. With your suggestion that only property owners vote is a throwback to the 18th and early 19th century. We've long moved beyond that point.

Interesting they would want to revisit it, with all the harm it does to the environment and all. Or was it all about politics afterall.....