Intellectual Conservative Politics and Philosophy » Nancy Salvato

Undermining the Covenant between Mother and Child

Nancy Salvato — Mon, 14 Aug 2006 12:30:53 +0000

All too often, the non-custodial parent is perceived as if he/she is a deadbeat and has no interest in the children.

This is a piece for divorced parents. It is written on behalf of the non-custodial parent; one who wants a relationship with the kids, yet finds the relationship compromised by the other parent. [...]

Malcolm in the Wrong

Nancy Salvato — Tue, 21 Mar 2006 13:00:08 +0000

The Center for Civic Education’s We the People continues to� cause controversy.

As I stated in a piece titled, “Civic Education Is Missing in the U.S. Diet,” the framers of the US Constitution realized that democracy would only work when citizens are included in making decisions. Civic responsibility means not only to possess knowledge of government, but to learn about processes and institutions that are effective in improving community conditions, developing skills necessary to participate in policymaking processes, and developing a mentality that includes performing lifelong service for the common good.

In “Producing Good Citizens Trumps Ideological Short-Sightedness,” I defend the federally funded Center for Civic Education’s books and programs by explaining that the federal government is charged with protecting our way of life.� Producing� the text, “We the People: The Citizen and the Constitution” is one way for the federal government to help ensure that the public schools help create civically minded citizens, not “Politically Correct” socialists who depend on others to decide what they think, how they will take care of themselves, and what laws we live by.� While I don’t believe that the federal government should be in the education business (nor the teacher’s unions for that matter), the federal government has a responsibility to ensure that we maintain our way of life.� If this textbook is what my federal tax dollars are going to support, then I am in full accordance with this legitimate use of public money. The Center publishes its own materials, distributes about 90% of them free, sells others at close to cost, and all proceeds go to furthering the programs of the Center and none to royalties or individuals.�

In “Who is Accusing Whom of having an Agenda?,” I refute the arguments made by Malcolm Kline in his piece, entitled, “We the Proletariat,” in which he states that the program is remiss in its goal to deepen adherents’ understanding of the American Constitutional system and its development.� � His argument that the text misleads students to believe that all rights reside with the federal government is outlandish.� One of the first ideas discussed in the text is how a Constitutional government establishes limits on the power of government to prevent it from violating natural rights and that the government is organized and power distributed in such a way as to increase the possibility that those limitations will be effective (p. 9, WTP).� The ideas of enumerated and un-enumerated rights are discussed in detail as well. (p. 210, WTP)

His second argument about the second amendment doesn’t hold any weight either.� According to his sources, the text defines this as the right of a state to have a militia but not as a personal right to bear arms.� Yet on page 240, right there in black and white, the second amendment is listed with a definition that includes both of these ideas.� Although the authors decided to focus more in depth discussion questions on the 1st amendment — because the rights protected under it are considered by many to be the most important — and on the rights of those accused of crimes and the procedures in the court system, this doesn’t mean an instructor can’t discuss in more detail some of the second amendment issues in the news. Because the Second Amendment is of historical and contemporary importance, it is introduced to students in the text, and a critical thinking exercise is devoted solely to it. The critical thinking exercise on the Second Amendment asks students to explore the reasons for its establishment and to develop their own positions on the contemporary relevance of the amendment and the extent of the rights it should be interpreted to protect. The Second Amendment is also treated in hearing questions that are a part of local, state, and national competitions held each year.�

Because the book doesn’t reflect a special interest agenda, it does not pass judgment on the United Nations, even though this critic would like it to include an anti-UN agenda.� He assumes that because the UN’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights is discussed in the book that this means that CCE is endorsing those rights over the natural rights protected in our own Constitution. However, it is simply a point of discussion. (pp 206-208)

His criticism of the common knowledge that, “Islamic countries take their code of laws from the teaching of the Koran, the book of sacred writings accepted by Muslims as revelations to the prophet Mohammed by God” being acknowledged in the text after 9/11 makes no sense.� What is his beef?� Should we ignore that Islam is derived from the Koran?� Is he saying it is� not?

He ends his malicious tirade accusing The Center for Civic Education’s WTP program as reflecting special interests which are intensely ideological.� It would seem that his accusation implicates himself as a hypocrite because WTP doesn’t follow the extremely ideological agenda he espouses.

I am more than willing to send a copy of the text to Malcolm Kline if he is willing to read it with fidelity.� That means that he has to open his mind and not be prejudiced against the material before he opens the book.� If he is willing, I’m sure he will find that We The People: The Citizen And The Constitution is a great teaching resource and that it would do our system of education in this country good to implement it instead of programs that teach kids how to place condoms on cucumbers.� After all, our freedom is the most valuable right protected under the Constitution.� And our Constitution is currently under attack by special interest groups wanting special rights and privileges — which has the effect of taking away the freedom our Constitution is meant to ensure.

To date, Mr. Kline has not taken me up on my offer, but he has continued to malign the Center for Civic Education and myself, most currently in his piece, “High School Confidential.”� To his assertion, “She never answered any of my direct quotes with primary quotations of her own,” I pride myself on researching a subject before writing about it.� I do not “opine” or “bloviate,” I present facts.� To his assertion, “She never mentioned that she works for the company that publishes the textbook,” I do not work for the Center for Civic Education, I volunteer as an Illinois District Coordinator. Most people affiliated with the center are volunteers. In that capacity, I distribute textbooks and mentor teachers in the WTP and Project Citizen programs.�

Someone with the title, Executive Director of Accuracy in Academia, should have to check his facts (and make no mistake, he has not) before opining about a program.� Rather than continue to propagate the myths of Ed Watch’s Alan Quist and adherents, I urge those interested in pursuing the truth in this matter, to take CCE up on its offer to provide copies of the texts with the disputed parts to concerned citizens so they can do their own homework and decide for themselves to what degree, if any, the allegations of EdWatch and its affiliates are merited. Now we can keep arguing amongst ourselves about the vehicle or we can focus on the real problem, which is that the Constitution is not being taught effectively in the classroom.� Those who insist on arguing about the vehicle effectively indoctrinate themselves as part of the problem.

We’re Not in Kansas Anymore: Dispelling the Myths about School Choice Once and for All

Nancy Salvato — Wed, 09 Nov 2005 07:09:01 +0000

The recently defeated Family Education Reimbursement Act would have provided needed relief and parental choice options for the 372,000 students displaced by hurricane Katrina by allowing them to enroll in a school of their parents’ choice for the 2005-06 school year.

Bob Sigman, Opinion Editor of The Johnson County Sun (KS), has a problem with the idea that, “State-financed vouchers could be used by students to attend the school of their choice, public or private.” � He believes that, “This would open the way to state support of private schools, breaking down the traditional barrier between church and state.” � What Mr. Sigman and all the other anti-school choice advocates should know is that the Supreme Court ruled in 2002, “that a neutral program that neither favors nor disfavors religion, vouchers directed by the private, independent choices of parents do not constitute state support or endorsement of religion.”

Unfortunately, this myth and many others influenced Congressional policy makers to vote down the Family Education Reimbursement Act (FERA) proposal — sponsored by Chairman John Boehner (R-OH) and Rep. Bobby Jindal (R-LA).� This proposal would have provided needed relief and parental choice options for the 372,000 students displaced by hurricane Katrina by allowing them to enroll in a school of their parents’ choice for the 2005-06 school year.

The Wall Street Journal considered FERA the best proposal because it would have circumvented the education bureaucracy that makes it difficult to provide immediate relief to families in need.� Perhaps fiscal conservatives that voted down the measure weren’t aware that, according to Joseph Bast and Herbert Walberg of the Heartland Institute, “Because of bureaucracy, two of every five tax dollars raised for schools do not even make it to the classroom.”

Legislators should be reminded that private schools are operated more cheaply than public schools. Just compare the average private school tuition, $4,689.00, to the average cost of educating a student in public school, $8,830.00.� Each child educated outside the public school system saves the state $3,535.00, according to Milton and Rose Friedman’s The ABCs of School Choice.� When the money follows the child it saves taxpayer dollars.

The idea that families would have been allowed to choose the best school — public, private, or charter — assuredly raised the hackles of those who fear the program’s success would serve as a catalyst for more school choice advocates to demand school choice be made available to all families who might be interested in private school options.� The reality is that taxpayers finance vouchers just as they do public schools.� Some taxpayers would rather see their children attend private schools.� Why should they have to pay twice?�

Vouchers create competition among public and private schools. Public schools would be forced to improve or they would lose enrollment. Studies done in Florida, Wisconsin, Texas, Maine & Vermont provide evidence that school choice does help public schools perform better, according to the Friedman study.

Another myth perpetuated by Mr. Sigman — that true comparisons between public and private schools cannot be made until the playing field is leveled — is simply not accurate. He relies on the argument that, “Private schools do not have to provide special education services.”� Yet, as reported in the June 2005 School Choice Advocate, parents of children diagnosed with learning disabilities do send their children to private schools in order to take advantage of smaller, more focused learning environments which can improve academic performance and self confidence.� Utah just passed a voucher bill specifically aimed at “special needs” children which will allow them to take advantage of private schools with specialized curriculum that meets the needs of those with particular learning disabilities.

Sigman bemoans the fact that, “Public schools must negotiate employment contracts with teachers, private schools do not. That can result in higher costs for salaries and other benefits.”� The FERA proposal simply tried to work around the education establishment by disposing of the layers upon layers of education bureaucracy that drives costs up and instead suggested working with an independent contractor to expediently and cost efficiently meet the demands of displaced families and the schools which accommodate their educational needs.

Although private schools are not required to be accredited by the state, most have stringent curriculum standards.� If a private school does not perform it will fail because students are not compelled to attend an underperforming school.� This means that teachers must be highly qualified and exert the effort required for success. Lower salaries do not deter all good teachers from working in private school environments because there are fewer behavioral issues and more administrative supports.� Students are expected to meet the curriculum demands which make them eligible for admission to four year colleges.

“If the state starts funding private schools through vouchers, Vratil warns [in Sigman’s OpEd], “there will be strings attached… Inevitably, the state will impose education requirements on private schools similar to those that govern public schools.” � Walberg and Bast say that this doesn’t have to happen if language included as part of a constitutional amendment establishes, “that the autonomy of private schools is in the public interest and that all regulations affecting private schools are ‘frozen’ at their pre-voucher levels.” Regulatory bodies will need to have their “membership equally balanced between government and private school interests.” � They suggest other ways to combat this possibility, as well.�

It is fiscally irresponsible to allow myths and irrational fears to influence the decisions made by those elected to represent us.� We the people need to express our dissatisfaction with the status quo educational practices that leave some children behind and embrace the power of the free market to drive the quality of education up.�

Nancy Salvato is the President of The Basics Project, a non-profit, non-partisan research and educational project whose mission is to promote the education of the American public on the basic elements of relevant political, legal and social issues important to our country. She is an experienced educator, an independent contractor with Prism Educational Consulting, and serves as Educational Liaison for Illinois Senator Carole Pankau.

Email Nancy Salvato

Gates’ Education Action Plan Needs Momentum

Nancy Salvato — Tue, 01 Mar 2005 22:08:01 +0000

Bill Gates should realize that only by inserting competition into the public school monopoly, will there be sufficient motivation to make his ideas on education more than a pipedream.

Bill Gates, a keynote speaker at the National Governors Association/Achieve Summit, recently remarked that our high schools are obsolete because the system only prepares one-third [...]

The Public School Lottery: The Glossary to Educational Choice

Nancy Salvato — Tue, 15 Feb 2005 22:11:21 +0000

Spending money on public school isn’t a lot different than depositing quarters into the Crane Game at an arcade and trying to grasp one of the low quality stuffed animals available to the select few who actually win.

There is an old adage which says that a person can save $365.00 a year by [...]

Student Vouchers Invite Government Involvement

Nancy Salvato — Tue, 01 Feb 2005 22:12:23 +0000

Vouchers, by their very nature, invite government regulation and the implementation of the public school agenda.

Casey Lartigue, in “Semantics and School Choice“, says that “there is no such thing as a “voucher school.” This is correct because an education/school voucher is a tax funded certificate, given to parents to pay for the education [...]

The Legacy of Rod Paige

Nancy Salvato — Wed, 17 Nov 2004 22:18:18 +0000

The “educrats” lost sight of the mission. Rod Paige and No Child Left Behind set the public schools back on course.

How will education change over the next four years? That is the question on many minds upon hearing that Rod Paige will be stepping down from his position as the Secretary of Education [...]

Are Chicago Public School Teachers Property?

Nancy Salvato — Mon, 01 Nov 2004 18:13:56 +0000

Chicago Mayor Daley has announced that he will enforce the residency requirement for Chicago school teachers.

Recently Chicago newspapers reported that Mayor Daley was going to enforce the residency requirement for Chicago school teachers. Something is inherently wrong with this decision because it seems to me as if by signing a teaching contract, teachers [...]

Too Many Cooks Running Our Schools

Nancy Salvato — Tue, 12 Oct 2004 12:45:02 +0000

The academic agenda of the public school system is as much determined by what is politically incorrect to discuss in the schools, as it is by the basic assumptions about the academic skills necessary to survive in our society.

The curriculum in our schools has been spoiled by the fact that there are too [...]

NEA Pro-Democrat, But One Bush Photo Stirs the Partisan Pot

Nancy Salvato — Thu, 07 Oct 2004 23:04:43 +0000

33-year old mom and middle school English teacher Shiba Pillai-Diaz walked out on her job after she was told by her Assistant Principal to remove a picture of President Bush from her classroom.

It’s probably common knowledge by now that a 33-year old mom and middle school English teacher, Shiba Pillai-Diaz of Crossroads South [...]