This blog was about the privatization of schools, vouchers, and a standard curriculum. The first part of the blog discusses the KKK's attempt to get rid of private schools in Oregon and standardize children in the 1920s. Jay P. Greene uses this example in order to suggest customized education for all children, rather than having a standard curriculum. Jay P. Greene feels that we should reject the notion of a "one size fits all" and the type of education system used today that produces children like a 19th century factory-like model. In order to do this, he believes that we should create educational savings accounts controlled by parents.
He goes on to talk about how the KKK isn't the only one vying to take control of the education system; both left and right groups are attempting to control schools for their own purposes. He then proposes that Milton Friedman's plan of separating school finance from the operation of schools as a solution to the problem of groups trying to create a biased education system. Advocates of Friedman's idea and greater parental choice have created a voucher program. Greene goes on to explain vouchers as basically a government-funded coupon that can be redeemed by parents at either a private or public school. He explains that studies have found that there are benefits to voucher programs, such as being a catalyst for the improvement of public schools.
Greene explains that fears of parental choice are unfounded, claiming that voucher programs would actually make public schools stronger. Jay proposes that public may become more like universities, offering course-by-course classes. Jay believes that parents should be in charge of the education system and that as many options as possible should be provided to the children of America.
This blog relates to class through many of the topics covered. As made clear by my summary of the blog, Greene discusses private schools, voucher programs, and a standard curriculum. I agree with Greene that a "one-size-fits-all" strategy is not effective when it comes to a curriculum, however I'm not quite convinced that a voucher program is the route that needs to be taken in order to fix this issue. While Greene states that voucher programs are a catalyst for the improvements of public schools, I disagree because I feel like more government money would simply go to the charter schools, leaving the public schools in worse shape. He says that his opinion is backed up by empirical data, I would enjoy seeing the data myself because many times graphs, charts, and etc. can be misleading. I'm also not quite sure that students attending multiple different schools, like described in his blog, would necessarily be a beneficial thing either. It seems to me, that unless these schools would be within a few miles from each other, no student could make it on time for their classes. Also, what about rural students who don't have another town for 20 miles? What exactly would they do? Or even athletics; what school would the student compete for? If you suggest combining schools for teams, then you force all of the students of the area to attend the same schools and then force them to have a "one-size-fits-all" education. I believe that the author comes from a progressive view because of his dislike of a core curriculum and his idea that parents should play a key democratic role in the curriculum decisions.
