Unions don’t exist only to enrich teachers. This sentiment originated from the anti-public school crowd (and Voucher proponents- HP:).

I have heard the “business” model for running schools before. (Actually, I first heard this about 10 years ago.) A story may illustrate the point. Business CEO’s hire the best that they are willing to pay for (which may not always be the best possible employee-think of some employees at various retailers.) These employees produce products from the “raw materials” needed. In schools, the CEO would be the Principal, the employee would be the teacher, and the material would be the student. If different businesses (schools) were to produce, say clothing, would each business be able to produce equal quality clothing. No. If one company has a fine wool to make pants, how much would these pants sell for? If another only had linen, what would these sell for? Both may be of exceptional quality, but will sell for different prices. Would the linen pants CEO be a failure because he or she only made $10 for each pair, while the other made a profit of $30? Obviously, the linen pants CEO is a faiure, since he didn’t reach the mandated $30 profit level.

Most critics of public schools probably have never been inside one to see the real work going on. School success starts before a student ever spends one minute at school. Family, neighborhood, family literacy, family linguistic abilities, etc. play a huge part. It is easy to say that one is a proponent of students. But remember, teachers are not the enemy, as is so often the case with the so-called reformers. Yes, I have read Harvard professor Caroine Hoxby’s work. I find her reasoning lacking. Just creating competiton for students via vouchers is a joke. Extra money for a special eduaction student will not create a demand for these students. Most private schools are not tested like public schools to verify proficency of teaching. (For example, the Catholic Church we attend has a school. Walk the hallways and look at the work-impressive, if you think plagarism is acceptable.) Also, studies have shown there is not a lot of open spaces in these schools. The dollar amount offered per student would not cover expansion or new school openings.

One huge point that people don’t realize is what is required for a second language learner to be successful. These students need to progress at a rate of 1 1/2 to 2 years each year to be on grade level by the end of elementary school. Add in a lack of primary language in many students and a new picture emerges. Failing schools often are amazing schools.

To close, more information (such as the noted database of knowledge) is useless if students don’t learn to read with fluency and comprehension. Many student fail to progress in reading because they lack books at home or a home environment that fosters reading. Students are taught reading at school; proficency is built with practice outside of school. But it is easier to blame unions, teachers, and so forth instead of looking at the larger picture. Children reflect many of the values of their community-good and bad. Want to “fix” schools? Fix the communtity.

Whats wrong with that? Schools are there for students, not for teachers. If such a method makes for better teachers (at the benefit of the students), I too would be all for it.

And–it updates much more often than Britannica!

It’s been done at the patent office.

The “article” should have chosen a better comparison than to choose Wikipedia as the standard.Wikipedia is having its own problems right now. “http://www.newsobserver.com/104/story/555755.html”

“http://www.technewsworld.com/story/56193.html”