Same old from Stanley

Charlie Sykes was great in providing us with the PodCasts of todays INSIGHT 2006. I listened to one today on Education with the controversy surrounding school choice in Milwaukee. I still contend that untill there is unlimited choice regardless of income with no caps in every district in the state, there is no such thing as choice. (See Is there choice in Education?) I have never been a fan of Stan Johnson, the President of WEAC (aka Education Mafia), (see WEAC Diatribe from Stan Johnson) and todays offering from him only contributes to that belief. When asked about the voucher controversy in Milwaukee, Stanley was asked if he supports the voucher schools and if he is in favor of expanding or keeping them. Here is the transcript of what he said.

I believe and I have to say, Howard and I are alike in that we both agree on one thing, that we are both about student achievement. Now we disagree on how that is attained. School choice basically to me and to our organization, has not proven, we have said it time and time again about how great the school choice schools are. We have absolutely no proof that they are doing that. Ya know and one of the things is that constantly Milwaukee Public Schools are doing a good job. But every time something is good with MPS, it is because of the voucher schools. Now if something goes wrong in MPS, you don't hear choice or voucher people taking the claim for that also, only the good things that happen. Amm. We have proven with the SAGE program that smaller class sizes which is the major reason why our parents want their kids in that type of environment because they know that one on one attention. Ya know you have it, in the private schools or maybe even in the voucher schools. The argument to me all the time is maybe, Howard , Jason, ourselves, can get together and push for that same program because we know it works. And there are items that we can agree on and move forward. But ya know the one thing I wanna make clear is that, ya know, vouchers are here. The supreme court has said they are here. What were trying to say is don't use the word competition with us. Because competition means that we have a level playing field. Currently there is not a level playing field. You end up comparing apples to oranges instead of apples to apples.
...
If I had my way, OK and our organization had our way, I believe in public education, I believe in anything you do that detracts from public education, resources being per kid so am I in favor of lifting the cap? No. Am I in favor of the voucher program itself? No. But it's here so we have to live with it. And what I would like to see are certain things that are not necessarily in this new agreement happen so we can get on. And you know, we talk a lot about competition. And what the cap would have produced I believe, in that choice and voucher system, is competition between the voucher students, having their strong schools survive and those sort of things.

I believe there is something I agree on. However, I don't think it is what he had in mind. He said, “Because competition means that we have a level playing field.” He didn't think he had and I agree 100%. WEAC has a monopoly. They like other monopolies hate the word competition. What could we do with competition? We could start with competition between teachers. Why is it that, at least in my neck of the woods, that an opening for a single teacher attracts upwards of 300 submissions of resumes? What if we could bid out teachers services? Why can't districts bid out their insurance benifits for their teahcers? Why do many districts pay over 1/2 million more per year using WEAC's insurance. (See The Truth About Teachers Health Care Costs,...) Why does the local competitor parochial school provide education at half the price? (I forgot, the price really is 1.5 times or they will take your house away). Why are you so blasted afraid of competition Stanley? If Wisconsin schools are so great and it's teachers so wonderful and competent, there would be nothing to worry about, right Stanley?

This line that Stanley spewed once agian, was extremely hard to follow but finds him saying the same old same old.

OnTheBorderLine