Former Ed Commissioner searches for relevance with worn out ideas
Tennessee’s former Education Commissioner, Kevin Huffman, is still sharking around education waters, peddling terrible ideas and being paid handsomely.
Yes, that Kevin Huffman. He’s now calling for a federal focus on education that would return test-and-punish principles and prescribe teaching methods.
We’ve seen his game before:
That’s right. Kevin Huffman blamed TN’s relatively low ranking on standardized tests on teachers – and not on the state’s chronically low investment in schools. Did nothing to push new investment in schools. Failed to deliver on promised new teacher development programs. Promised teachers a pay raise and then failed to deliver. Pushed a charter advancement agenda that, as Green’s column notes, caused “more harm than good.” Never apologized for any of it.
Yes, vouchers themselves are budget-busters. But, this proposed amendment also includes a key provision that could create headaches for school districts, principals, and teachers.
THAT PARENTS HAVE THE RIGHT TO DIRECT THE EDUCATION OF THEIR CHILDREN
Those are the words causing great concern.
Because, what do they mean? Do words even mean anything?
Here are some of the ways this language might be interpreted:
Wouldn’t this amendment also allow parents to intrude into every classroom? If I have a constitutional right to direct my child’s education, does that not mean that I can tell my child’s science teacher to stop teaching evolution? Or start teaching evolution? Can I demand a different approach to teaching American history? How about prepositions? And how will a classroom teacher even function if every child in the classroom comes with a parent who has a constitutional right to direct their education?
A representative of the state’s Parent Teacher Association (PTA) says the law, if adopted, would amount to chaos.
And it wouldn’t just be limited to chaos in public schools. All parents would have the guaranteed, constitutionally-protected right to “direct” their child’s education – no matter the school setting.
It seems likely that if the law passed, one or several court cases would have to be heard to determine the exact meaning of “directing a child’s learning.”
If I have a right to choose a private school paid for by tax dollars but the private school doesn’t accept my kid, then what? Doesn’t the law say the “choice” is mine – and I’m “directing” the state to use its dollars to educate my child at the school I choose? Which means if the school doesn’t “choose” my kid, they are breaking the law? Infringing on my rights?
I’m not sure this law will pass, but if it does, Colorado will be in for – chaos.
A Kentucky student highlights problems created by school voucher schemes
As Kentucky voters consider a an amendment to the state’s Constitution that would allow the use of public funds to support private K-12 schools, one private school student is speaking out on why that’s a very bad idea.
One of the scariest things about Amendment 2 is that it basically serves as a blank check for vouchers to non-public schools with no clear place for the funding to come from other than public schools.
Tennessee policymakers should remember, too, that just as in Kentucky, the school voucher scheme is likely to funnel tax dollars from rural districts and send them to urban and suburban private schools.
Of course, that won’t stop Gov. Lee from trying again to pass a universal school voucher bill.
Democratic legislative leaders sent an outline of the policy agenda to members of the media. Among the items included are:
Ending the grocery tax
Free school meals for all kids
Expanded access to health coverage
Raising the minimum wage
Democrats have proposed free school meals before, but the proposal typically is shot down by the GOP-majority in committee.
Estimates of past proposals suggest the total cost would be around $500-$700 million a year. For reference, the state provided more than $500 million to the Tennessee Titans to build a new (smaller) stadium. Lawmakers also passed $1.6 billion worth of corporate tax breaks during the last legislative session. And, Gov. Lee insisted that nearly $150 million be “set aside” for his private school voucher proposal, a plan that failed to secure enough votes to advance in the 2024 session.
The point: We can afford to feed every kid who comes to school every day. Gov. Lee and the legislative majority just don’t want to.
A new California law seeks to prohibit “addictive content” from being served to children during school hours via cell phone apps.
Of course, there are all sorts of problems with implementation and enforcement.
But, the passage of this law points to an uncomfortable reality: cell phone addiction is a “new normal.”
We expect kids to be addicted to their phones, and are now entering the phase of attempting to “manage” that addiction.
Last year, Gallup found that over half of U.S. teens ages 13-19 spend an average of 4.8 hours a day on social media. Female teens spend an average of 5.3 each day on social media compared to the 4.4 hours average of teen males. A Common Sense Media Study found that 97% of kids 11 through 17 years old use their phones at school. The most popular usage among teenagers is TikTok at 32%, YouTube at 26%, and gaming at 17%.
Screens are everywhere. Devices – laptops, tablets, phones. Non-stop screen access for students – at home, school, in their rooms, at after-school activities and jobs.
While these devices offer convenience, educators (and some parents) are noting that 24/7 screen access is creating some problems.
I started Everyschool because I have come to believe that educational technology is not the panacea we’ve been told it is, and while some technology is transformative for some students, screens in schools have become yet another source of technology oversaturation in our children’s lives, often resulting in students being less smart, less happy, and less healthy.
She notes:
The reality is that we need to strike a balance. We should invest in technology that provides students with unique, high-level skills, while limiting tech that produces questionable outcomes, impairs human connection, and exposes students to unnecessary screen time. At Everyschool, we focus on identifying and eliminating problematic EdTech, but we also support incorporating transformative technology when developmentally appropriate into education.
Colorado, Kentucky, and Nebraska all have voucher votes on the ballot.
Peter Greene reminds us:
These are three different approaches to the question of taxpayer-funded school vouchers, but they share the unusual feature of putting voucher programs to a public vote. All school voucher programs in the U. S. were passed into law by legislatures, sometimes over strong objections of the taxpayers. No taxpayer-funded school voucher program has ever survived a public vote.
The third issue that the U.S. Supreme Court must address is that it needs to determine whether those who run charter schools are state or private actors. This is because the vast majority of people who run charter schools are private groups. However, these charters are defined by law as public schools and are supported by tax-payer dollars. If the Court rules that those who operate the charter schools are state actors, then because they must be non-sectarian, religious charter schools will be ruled unconstitutional. However, if the Court rules that charter schools are private actors, then religious charter schools will be ruled constitutional.
In Kentucky, the Commonwealth’s highest court found that because charter schools are operated by private actors, they are essentially private schools. In other states, that has not been the case. It will be interesting to see how the U.S. Supreme Court sorts this out.
Education has been a hot topic in Nebraska for months because of school choice legislation, now there is a microscope on it nationally, with the Trump/Vance campaign calling for the closure of the Department of Education. Teachers and education leaders in Omaha spoke out against proposed federal education cuts and elimination of the Department of Education.
House Speaker Cameron Sexton has floated the idea of Tennessee rejecting federal education spending because he’s not a fan of the strings attached to the nearly $2 billion the state receives each year to help fund public schools.
When asked to clarify, Sexton revealed that he wasn’t suggesting “doing without,” but rather that the state would simply pick up the tab.
Photo by John Guccione www.advergroup.com on Pexels.com
