by Tom Condon
April 30, 2011 in Question of the Week, Should tax dollars be used to send lower-income students to faith-based schools? by Tom Condon
Last weekend the Commercial Appeal published an article over two days about the Catholic Jubilee Schools and the hope they have given inner city neighborhoods. I think it would be acceptable for parents to use vouchers to send their children to these or other faith based schools.
April 30, 2011 in Question of the Week, Should tax dollars be used to send lower-income students to faith-based schools? by André Johnson
In the news recently, police jailed poor single mothers because they have elected to enroll their children in schools outside of their designated areas. One was a homeless woman in Connecticut, http://gothamist.com/2011/04/27/homeless_mother_in_court_for_illega.php and the other, a woman in Ohio http://www.aolnews.com/2011/01/26/ohio-mom-kelley-williams-bolar-jailed-for-lying-about-kids-scho/. Their crime: they wanted their child to attend a “good” school. They apparently felt that the school the district assigned their children to attend was not good enough. Therefore, they sought out other options.
This is where proponents of vouchers focus their arguments. They argue that everyone should have an option to send their children to the best schools. Why should poor parents not have the option to send their children to schools that the rich do? Why not set aside $5,400 for parents to help offset the cost of a good education. The foundation of this argument is that the public school system is broken and the only out is to have kids attend these good institutions.
However plausible that argument is on the surface, it does not address the real issue–why are there “good” schools and why are there some “bad” schools? Why do we frame the conversation around good and bad schools anyway? Why some schools optional and others are are not? Why cannot parents feel just as good at sending their children to the school across the street from their home as sending the children across town? Moreover, what are we going to do with all of the children who do not get in to the “good” schools? By framing the discussion around good and bad schools; around public and private, and yes, around who gets vouchers and who does not, we are telling everyone, especially our students and teachers, “Hey, there are some good schools and if you are not attending them, then you must attend a bad one.”
We see good school bad school dichotomy at work every year when parents line up at the Board of Education overnight to get their children into good schools. We see it when parents “brag” about getting their child into a “charter school,” or my daughter or son will not attend that school. I hear it even from preachers, who themselves pastor and serve urban churches and where many of their congregants attend the so-called “bad” schools, who would not dare to “sacrifice their children,” to these “pitiful” public schools. No, vouchers would not stop our “good school” “bad school” dichotomy.
However, what it will do is get a lot of private school owners and shareholders rich by having a guaranteed income source without the mandates that public schools have. It will continue to drain an already beleaguered public school system all the talented teachers and gifted students and leave behind the less professional and challenged children in run down and forgotten schools. Why? Because it will continue to siphon money away from the public schools as more and more politicians–being “lobbied” by private institutions will feel “obligated” to increase funding or provide incentives that would secure these schools from any type of regulation. It will only perpetrate and expose even more the lingering problems we have at educating our students. Until we make all the schools good schools, we will not solve any of our lingering problems concerning education.
by Bob McBride
April 30, 2011 in Question of the Week, Should tax dollars be used to send lower-income students to faith-based schools? by Bob McBride
Should tax dollars be used to send lower-income students to faith-based schools? Should faith-based schools accept government support? Is there a better way for faith-based schools to help lower-income students?
In theory, it seems that anything that will strengthen the moral fiber of a child would be deemed good. However, it would seem that if government funds were used to support any student who attends a private faith-based school then that school would most likely be mandated to follow government rules and regulations which would hinder the mission of the institution.
If the government did not interfere with the daily routine of the school then there very well may be a valid argument for allowing lower income students to attend a religiously oriented school using tax dollars. Using Charter Schools as the example, the students are allowed to choose a specific school that best fits their academic needs. If some parents feel that a faith-based institution would enhance the learning of their child, then it may be appropriate to enroll them in the school.
In most cases, it is not the school or any other institution which is going to provide a solid learning foundation for a child; it must begin in the home with the parents. Until the parent(s) take an active role in the education of their child, the child will continue to struggle academically. One would assume and hope that attendance at a religious institution will not only provide an avenue for academic learning but also provide a basis for the development of the moral character.
It is difficult to conclude that using tax dollars to allow any child to attend a religiously oriented school is the best way to help disadvantaged children; however, it is one of several initiatives which could be explored. Faith-based schools and the faiths which they represent should always look for ways to enhance the lives of our youth, especially those who may be economically disadvantaged. That assistance can come in various ways such as tuition assistance, inner city ministering and or tutoring. Children need positive role models which may be accomplished in various ways.
April 29, 2011 in Question of the Week, Should tax dollars be used to send lower-income students to faith-based schools?, Spotlight Answers by Randolph Meade Walker
In the United States we are guided by the doctrine of separation of Church and state. Due to the tragic history in Europe of sectarian violence and the tyranny of an established Church, America thought it would be best to let the Church be the Church and the government be the government.
As commendable as the theory for separation may be, it is an artificial partition. Human beings are social beings, who need a totality of social institutions, which includes religion and politics. The need is seamless and any attempt to separate them leaves one unbalanced and without a vital need being fulfilled.
Additionally, American democracy is predicated upon a leveling of public services and opportunities. In higher education, several Ivy League schools have special financial assistance for low income students. Also private religious colleges and universities have access to tax-payer funds from Pell Grants and other federal monies.
Hence, there is already a precedent for higher education subsidizing religious colleges and universities with federal money, so there should be no problem for elementary, middle, and high schools using federal money to educated low income students. If federal finances are an equalizer in post secondary religious educational institutions, they should be able to be used in the same type of institutions, which prepare students to enter them.
April 28, 2011 in Question of the Week, Should tax dollars be used to send lower-income students to faith-based schools?, Spotlight Answers by Carla Meisterman
As a Presbyterian, and a minister in The Presbyterian Church (USA), I cannot look at these questions without remembering my denomination’s long and illustrious tradition of valuing the cultivation of intellect through excellent education. We are people who value education and the use of our intellectual capacity in our life of faith. John Calvin, who greatly influenced the development of Presbyterian theology, believed that in order to “rightly divide” God’s word, you had to be educated in language and the humanities.
That passion for excellence in educational formation has stayed with Presbyterian folk for centuries. I received my undergraduate degree from Illinois’ Millikin University, which, like Memphis’ own Rhodes College, was an institution of higher learning founded by faithful Presbyterians. I was raised and educated in both public and private educational institutions. My daughters have been as well.
There is a great and ongoing debate in this country over tax dollars – what they are for – and if the government has enough of them. It is the national debate of our time : “How do we fund what the government provides and how do we evaluate what the government is responsible for?” I believe that government has a large hand in the educational processes in this country. I also believe that many people who pay tax dollars locally have no earthly idea how those dollars are applied in our public educational system or that faith based grants are offered to religious institutions by the government. As good citizens, it would be of great value for each taxpayer to know how tax dollars are being spent locally on public and private educational and religious ventures. We need to be more inquisitive and we need to take more of an interest in what is already happening. This would help all of us to be better informed in constructing our opinions about what “needs to happen.”
If you are familiar with the Constitution of the United States, you know that the phrase separation of church and state does not appear in it. It was Thomas Jefferson who interpreted that the First Amendment put up a “wall of separation” between church and state. Jefferson’s interpretation has been the subject matter of many Supreme Court cases.1
The First Amendment states that Congress shall not make a law for the establishment of religion and cannot impede the practice of religion. In 1971, the case, Lemon v Kurtzman (403 US 602 [1971]), established what is known as “ The Lemon Test.” The ruling answered the question: can the state pay some of the salary of teachers who teach in parochial schools? The Supreme Court wrote: “In the absence of precisely stated constitutional prohibitions, we must draw lines with reference to the three main evils against which the Establishment Clause was intended to afford protection: “sponsorship, financial support, and active involvement of the sovereign in religious activity. Every analysis in this area must begin with consideration of the cumulative criteria developed by the Court over many years. Three such tests may be gleaned from our cases. First, the statute must have a secular legislative purpose; second, its principal or primary effect must be one that neither advances nor inhibits religion; finally, the statute must not foster “an excessive government entanglement with religion.”2
It is my sincere belief that religious people who are congregants at churches, synagogues and mosques… faithful and competent people… and capable citizens of age in this city and this county have tremendous opportunities to support public education through Memphis’ Adopt A School program, through tutoring, through mentoring, and through volunteering – but I do not believe it wise to mix government dollars with faith-based initiatives.
If every qualified person who attended a church, synagogue or mosque would commit to meet with a child in a public school to tutor or mentor them each school year, the spirit of this city would change, the minds of the children would be changed, and the hearts of our citizens would change. The children in Mid-South schools would have a chance to climb higher on the ladder of disillusioning statistics. If every one of us who have benefited from a good education would turn and help a child in our public school systems – we could change the results of the 2007 report from the Urban Child Institute which said, “Children born and raised in Shelby County face some of the grimmest futures in the nation.”3
What the children of our city need is to know that we care about them – that they are worth our investment of time and attention – not simply that our government will provide for a few of them to improve their educational environment through help with tuition to attend a faith based school.
April 28, 2011 in Question of the Week, Should tax dollars be used to send lower-income students to faith-based schools?, Spotlight Answers by Chris Altrock
The question about school vouchers is a complex one involving political, social, economic, spiritual, and cultural issues. To deal with this complexity, I turn towards one of the simplest yet significant claims of the Judeo-Christian faith. Psalms 68:5 proclaims, “Father of the fatherless and protector of widows is God in his holy habitation.” One of God’s fundamental qualities is that he is the “father of the fatherless.” That is, nothing beats closer to God’s heart than the state of a nation’s children. In Isaiah 1, God sends foreign enemies to devastate the nation of Judah and rejects her worship in part because of her neglect of children (Isaiah 1:23). In other words, the way a nation responds to children has far-reaching consequences. Somehow this truth must inform the discussion of school vouchers.
The central question seems to be this: how do we ensure that children of all ages, races, and socioeconomic background have access to high quality education? Surely this is part of the way we demonstrate a concern for children that mirrors God’s concern. One way we nurture rather than neglect children is through the provision of life-shaping education.
After conversing with a good friend of mine in the education system, however, it appears to me that this provision is affected largely by finances. When it comes to public education, families of certain incomes can afford to move to neighborhoods that feed into higher performing schools. When it comes to private education, families of certain incomes can afford to choose higher performing schools. But for children of lower income families, they have neither option. They cannot afford to move to a neighborhood which feeds into a higher performing public school. And they cannot afford to choose a higher performing private school.
How then, do we help these children gain the education they need? We can, of course, consider greater funding for lower performing public schools in the hopes they will improve. This might allow lower income children who cannot move to attend a more effective school right where they live. Or we can, as the legislature has just done, consider granting funds directly to lower income children, giving them a great potential for attending a higher performing school (in this case, a private school). And, there are other options.
Are school vouchers the best option? I truly do not know. But one thing I do know is that this is no small matter. The way a nation nurtures or fails to nurture her children impacts the entire nation. This issue is one worthy of our best thinking, most passionate investment, and most sincere efforts.
April 28, 2011 in Question of the Week, Should tax dollars be used to send lower-income students to faith-based schools?, Spotlight Answers by Burton Carley
The central idea behind the Civil Rights Movement was to hold government accountable for the basic rights of all people. This included the right to vote, protection against discrimination in housing and jobs, equal access to public facilities, and most importantly the desegregation of public schools. One response to desegregation was an exodus of Caucasian students from public schools into parochial and private schools. Why? The constitutional protections that apply to public education generally do not need to be honored in private education.
Privatizing education with a voucher system under the principle of “freedom of choice” not only weakens public education as an essential element of democracy but also threatens the gains of the Civil Rights Movement. Faith-based schools since they are privately funded may establish selective criteria based on religious or academic or family or personal characteristics. They are only accountable to their boards and clients. Public schools are open to all children and are accountable not only to parents but to all taxpayers.
In addition faith-based schools do not have to provide the same level of special education services, access to those with disabilities or bilingual education. There is no requirement for sensitivity regarding discrimination based on gender or sexual orientation. Even the right to free speech may be limited.
A second concern is using public tax money in support of religious education that promotes sectarian beliefs. This violates the separation of church and state. Some taxpayers may not wish to contribute to faith-based schools that advocate strong positions against gay rights, reproductive freedom or evolution. Forcing taxpayers to underwrite schools that express religious or moral points of view they strongly disagree with violates the right to support only those faith communities according to one’s conscience.
I support the right of parents to choose public, private or faith-based schools for their children. I support the right of anyone to contribute to religious schools whether or not they belong to that faith community. I oppose public funds to do so. It is the wrong way for government to exercise its responsibility for universal public education.
by David Hall
April 28, 2011 in Question of the Week, Should tax dollars be used to send lower-income students to faith-based schools?, Spotlight Answers by David Hall
Should tax dollars be used to send lower-income students to faith-based schools? Should faith-based schools accept government support? Is there a better way for faith-based schools to help lower-income students?
The public will learn and grow to appreciate that faith-based organizations are not only Christian. What will happen when a naturalist, agnostic or Devil worshiping institution applies for funds? The precedent has been set and the politics are sure. Has anyone challenged the right of a faith-based institution to bar an believer from another faith?
The current public system is beleaguered because of obligations to produce the next generation of scholars and productive citizens. The current system is failing by a wide margin to produce quality students. I believe there is a better way than the state providing money for religious institutions of higher learning. These allocations cut money from an already impoverished public school system.
Lower income children need better education and poverty is not the only reason for them failing to receive good education. That is a precedent that needs challenging and a new disciple and purpose found.
by Rick Donlon
April 28, 2011 in Featured Question of the Week, Question of the Week, Should tax dollars be used to send lower-income students to faith-based schools? by Rick Donlon
Should tax dollars be used to send lower-income students to faith-based schools? Should faith-based schools accept government support? Is there a better way for faith-based schools to help lower-income students?
In 1999 Christ Community Health Services began operating a health center in Binghampton; I was the first doctor assigned there.
After years in medically underserved neighborhoods, I agree with Dr. Scott Morris when he declares that education is a health issue. Research confirms that poor kids with good educational opportunities have a chance to escape poverty. Those without such opportunities will almost certainly remain poor. And so will their children.
Thinking myself clever in 1999, I concocted a plan to transform urban education–first in Binghampton, then all of Memphis. Following my successes in Memphis, I anticipated being offered (but politely declining) the post of U.S. Secretary of Education.
First, I had to figure out how to get urban kids reading early. There’s frightening evidence that if a child isn’t reading at grade level by age 8, they’ll likely never catch up. To that end, I found a controversial instructional program that had demonstrated success among poor and minority students.
I understood that changing the way a school system taught kids how to read would be difficult.
I started by calling the principal of the nearest MCS elementary school and asking if I could meet with her. I also called the “adopt a school” folks and told them that our clinic wanted to help.
When I met the principal, I was impressed. She looked and spoke like a veteran educator. As she showed me around the school, she appeared to have the respect of her staff and teachers. I was convinced that she was someone I could work with.
My next move: I asked the principal what Christ Community could do for her school. My hope was to win her trust with meaningful assistance–and eventually persuade her to allow a pilot project of my reading program.
She asked us to fund a social worker who could track absent kids, connect with uninvolved parents, and otherwise assist the front office. We quickly identified someone within our organization, and, with the help of the Urban Youth Initiative, hired her. (She still works there, eleven years later).
Next, the principal asked for $15,000 for a new computer center, a place where students could use software to assist them with reading and math. We located a private donor and the center opened near the end of the first semester. I was thrilled, planning to introduce the reading plan after the Christmas break.
When school resumed in January, the principal was out sick. I called later that week and was told she was still not back. Ditto for the next week. I emailed her, offering our medical services, but didn’t get a reply.
By the fourth week, our recently placed employee reported that things were unraveling at the school. More than a dozen of the teachers were calling in sick daily, without enough substitute teachers willing to fill in. Classes were combined, sometimes as many as three together. Meaningful instruction in most classrooms had ground to a halt. Behavior problems were escalating, even to the point of the Memphis Police Department twice being called to the campus.
The assistant principal reportedly didn’t know anything about the principal’s status or when she might be back. I saw for myself that the school was in chaos, but it was another two weeks before I understood what was happening.
The principal, it turned out, was scheduled to retire at the end of the academic year. Over her years at MCS, she’d acquired enough sick leave to stay at home for the entire last semester. She did not, however, inform MCS of her intention–not to mention the 800-plus students and their parents.
In late February I spoke to the school board member responsible for the area. She confirmed that the board was unaware that the principal had not been at her post for weeks. More alarming, the school board member told me that union rules made the practice of not working for weeks or months at the end of a career common.
The board eventually called a retired principal back to caretake for the remainder of the academic year. It was mid-March before he arrived. Over the subsequent 10 years, the school has had four more principals. Throughout those years, it has remained on the list of poorest performing MCS schools.
Should we allow poor families to take state educational vouchers and use them for private or even parochial education?
Hell yes.
by Larry Lloyd
April 28, 2011 in Featured Question of the Week, Question of the Week, Should tax dollars be used to send lower-income students to faith-based schools? by Larry Lloyd
Should tax dollars be used to send lower-income students to faith-based schools? Should faith-based schools accept government support? Is there a better way for faith-based schools to help lower-income students?
Instead of vouchers, why not take our cue from the Jubilee Schools? Just think of all the Protestant church-related private schools in Memphis? What if each one of these made a commitment to start a school in an urban community to serve the children there?
Vouchers being considered by the Tennessee legislature are of little help as they will only cover half the tuition at most of the private schools in Shelby County anyway. Plus, there’s the obvious fact that these schools are not readily accessible to under resourced neighborhoods. Why can’t the people of faith and people of good will work together and establish a citywide quality alternative to the educational quagmire we find ourselves in?
The Catholic Church has heard and felt the need and has risen to meet that challenge. We need the Protestant church and its educational system to make a similar commitment and together forge a system that can give more and more kids in our city a chance for a bright future, thereby creating the ‘tipping point’ that the anonymous donors to the Jubilee Schools suggested in the recent article by David Waters.
Such a tipping point will continue to push public schools to greater performance and everyone wins. I am a public school advocate, graduating from Snowden and Central a while back. All four of my daughters graduated from MCS and all have gone on to higher education and careers. But the education we received is not afforded across the board today. We can do better. We must do better for our children and for our city.
Scripps Interactive Newspapers Group
