The solution for South Carolina’s low SAT test scores and its high dropout rates has been much debated. Now a well-meaning group of citizens are suggesting that our state constitution might be holding us back. That constitution mandates a “minimally adequate” education for all students.
There are those who believe that if we change our constitutional mandate for education, our education problems will be solved. Accordingly, an effort is underway to amend our constitution to replace its current mandate for “minimally adequate” to “high quality education, allowing each student to reach his highest potential.”
Who among us could oppose such a noble intent? Certainly, all of us want every student to reach his or her highest potential. And South Carolina for many years has backed up its commitment to its youth with educational spending that places us among the most generous states, particularly as a percentage of per capita income.
Our education leaders often remind us that South Carolina’s education standards are among the highest in the nation. Thus, one might wonder why the wording of a centuries old constitution should matter. If our constitution has not prevented us from establishing some of the highest standards in the nation, it certainly would not prevent us from meeting those same standards.
Those behind this effort to change our state constitution know that if they can change the wording of the constitution, they can circumvent our State Legislature and file suit, as they have done in 45 other states, to get our State Court System to mandate large increases in education spending. In effect, this approach would mandate large increases in taxes as well.
The educational establishment is right in setting high standards for student performance. But reasonable people would be justified in asking whether that establishment has made “minimally adequate” use of the generous resources already provided by the taxpayers of our state. When we require that our education system focus our education tax dollars on teachers in the classrooms, instead of on large administrative bureaucracies, we then will truly begin to offer a high quality education where each student will be allowed to reach his or her highest potential.
There are those who believe that if we change our constitutional mandate for education, our education problems will be solved. Accordingly, an effort is underway to amend our constitution to replace its current mandate for “minimally adequate” to “high quality education, allowing each student to reach his highest potential.”
Who among us could oppose such a noble intent? Certainly, all of us want every student to reach his or her highest potential. And South Carolina for many years has backed up its commitment to its youth with educational spending that places us among the most generous states, particularly as a percentage of per capita income.
Our education leaders often remind us that South Carolina’s education standards are among the highest in the nation. Thus, one might wonder why the wording of a centuries old constitution should matter. If our constitution has not prevented us from establishing some of the highest standards in the nation, it certainly would not prevent us from meeting those same standards.
Those behind this effort to change our state constitution know that if they can change the wording of the constitution, they can circumvent our State Legislature and file suit, as they have done in 45 other states, to get our State Court System to mandate large increases in education spending. In effect, this approach would mandate large increases in taxes as well.
The educational establishment is right in setting high standards for student performance. But reasonable people would be justified in asking whether that establishment has made “minimally adequate” use of the generous resources already provided by the taxpayers of our state. When we require that our education system focus our education tax dollars on teachers in the classrooms, instead of on large administrative bureaucracies, we then will truly begin to offer a high quality education where each student will be allowed to reach his or her highest potential.
6 comments:
Yes, you said it like it is.
Keep hiring administrators and spend more money on their salaries and before long our schools will become perfect. And in our underperforming schools, just spend more money and those kids will turn into Rhodes Scholars, even if the student's parents are drunken bums and their teachers can hardly speak English. Thank goodness the media has figured it all out for us.
Surely you know why what the Constitution says matters. Or at least, I would hope that you do.
As anyone who had read the order in the "Corridor of Shame" case knows, the problem is that courts interpret "minimally adequate" as something less than what most of us would want for our children and less than what some of think is required in a land so bountiful as America. If the words are changed to "high quality," the courts will have an easier time of interpreting that language in a way that would help raise that baseline.
Your question--which I assume was rhetorical--about why we can't meet standards if we've set them, also has a very basic answer. Setting standards is the work of a few bureaucrats in Columbia who, although well intentioned, may well have never set foot in a rural school, and almost certainly didn't come from one. Meeting standards involves parents, teachers, students, and communities. And it takes money - books cost money, having facilities in which students are freezing or sniffling because of mold costs money. The best technology costs money. And with the State Legislature spending its time stamping out tourism publicity and coming up with unconstitutional license plates instead of finding ways to fund the educational needs for every child, well - the standards from the bureaucrats won't be met by the people on the ground.
You can try to make this about fiscal responsibility if you want, but interestingly enough, the people who are fighting against the constitutional amendment and refusing to provide more funding aren't doing a thing to ratchet down the so-called administrative bureaucracies. This leads me to believe it's about something else.
Richard - I think that's a great idea. In fact, we need to enact constitutional amendments to solve all my personal problems.
This would include "allowing my checking account and 401K fund to reach its highest potential” and one that protects my right to "high quality alcoholic beverages".
After all, if they say a blank check constitutional amendment is all it takes to solve the world's problems, I may as well get my piece of the action.
Mr. Eckstrom,
I would be grateful for your comment on my post regarding South Carolina educators: http://garnetspy.com/
Thanks!
General Eckstrom, as a conservative South Carolinian the only blogs I regularly read are:
SC Hotline
Blogland of Earl Capps
Watchdog fot the Taxpayers
SC Hotline is very informative and they have news in much higher quality than we get on the local TV stations or newspapers. And I want to thank you (and Mr. Capps)for keeping on telling it like it is, as Moyne said in his post above, even when the prevailing winds of the dominant media culture are blowing in the opposite direction.
Post a Comment