Quantcast
Home manage Las Vegas Review-Journal
  Jobs Cars Homes Shopping Travel Weddings Golf Best of Las Vegas Photo   Search:

RECENT EDITIONS
Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun

Opinion


VIN SUPRYNOWICZ: Promote quality education -- slash funding

The "experts" seem to have overestimated the tax revenues our greedy Nevada bureaucrats will get their mitts on this year by about a billion bucks.

I submit three modest suggestions:


Most Popular Stories
  • EDITORIAL: Stood her ground
  • Smart meters not all they're cracked up to be
  • LETTERS: Nursery did the right thing with laborers
  • EDITORIAL: Numbers stink?
  • EDITORIAL: Going to extremes
  • LETTERS: Teachers not most important learning variable
  • LETTERS: Agassi remains a good citizen
  • EDITORIAL: Clunk, clunk
  • LETTERS: Put aside re-election interests for nation's good
  • EDITORIAL: Election results




  • 1) Dig up a couple of Nevada state budgets from 1958 and 1908. Not much need to examine the actual dollar amounts under the various headings, since the 2008 dollar is worth about 2 to 3 cents in 1908 dollars. (But the inflation rate is only 2.2 percent; I heard it from a government "expert" so I know it's true.)

    Instead, just compare the headings with this year's proposed budget -- the names of the state departments, divisions, offices and programs. Cross out any headings from the 2008 budget that did not appear in the 1958 budget. After all, Nevada was a relatively happy and prosperous place in 1958, wasn't it? Do you remember anyone back in 1958 squawking that Nevada "didn't have enough government"?

    Zero out the budgets of all the departments, divisions, offices, and programs you've just crossed out. Close them. Auction off their buildings and equipment.

    Now take 10 percent of the money you just saved and allocate it to the office of the state attorney general, with instructions to use it to pro-actively sue the federal government in the U.S. Supreme Court under the 10th Amendment, demanding that the federal government be barred from using any means whatever to buffalo us into restoring any of that unnecessary and harmful spending -- or (failing that) that the court at least order the federals to pay the ful costs of any restored programs.

    If that doesn't get spending back within current cash flow, repeat the process, using the 1908 budget.

    For the record, once again, I don't believe the government schools can be "reformed," since they're producing a dumbed down peasant class trained to jeer in unison, eagerly ridiculing the objections of the still-awake remnant ("citing the words of dead white slave owners!") as the G-men systematically strip away our liberties "for our own protection" -- precisely as these schools were designed to.

    America will steadily lose its leadership in one domain after another till the government schools are abandoned and we go back to the system of allowing parents to provide for their own children's education which prevailed pretty much through the Civil War.

    (Yes, slaves were an unfortunate exception. I have a firm position on slavery. I'm against it. Those who favor a personal income tax and mandatory government schooling may want to keep in mind that they're actually endorsing forms of slavery and involuntary servitude.)

    But if the governor is really looking for some big savings, here are two more solutions he could try, answering those who argue that mere "across-the-board" cuts show a lack of "vision" and "leadership":

    2) If you harbor and give aid and comfort to a culprit who any reasonable person would suspect of being a lawbreaker, you're an "accessory after the fact." No one is authorized to use our tax money to commit this crime, and any court ordering anyone to commit this crime must be defied. Start demanding proof of legal residency for all children enrolling in Nevada's government schools. This single step could reduce schooling costs by 20 percent or more. Those who seek to help these children should be encouraged to endow scholarships for them at private schools ... in their home countries.

    3) After children in Nevada's government schools complete the second grade, test them on the basic academics needed to do third grade work. Also test to see if they're qualified to move on to fourth or fifth grade.

    Promote those who pass. Allow those who have mastered higher-level material to skip ahead as much as two grades. Those who fail must be held back to repeat the second grade. Warn their parents that if they can't master the material after two years, they'll be expelled: "You've used up your chance at a free, tax-funded education; good luck elsewhere."

    Repeat at the end of each year.

    After the eighth grade, any child whose test results (on real academic subjects, not Politically Correct gibberish) show reasonable potential to complete a college prep course may advance to high school. Those whose test scores fall into a "maybe" range get to choose for themselves. Those whose grades and scores say "no way" get diverted into a two-year vocational course designed to help them choose and qualify as apprentices in any of a number of respectable trades.

    A small percentage of children, determining that they can earn their freedom in as little as six years, will apply themselves, pass their high school graduation exams at 12 or 13, and receive their diplomas. The taxpayers will have saved 50 percent of the cost of their schooling, and the kids -- still bright and eager -- will not have been bogged down in a stultifying morass, marking time as teachers fruitlessly cajole the sluggards to stop goofing around.

    The size of Nevada's high school classes would likely be reduced by half, at a vast financial savings, meantime setting college preparatory students free to once again advance academically at a rate comparable to the rest of the developed world.

    Far from being a radical proposal, this would match educational practice in most of this country before 1950 -- and in most of the developed world, to this day.

    Who will squawk loudest at this modest proposal? The very educrats who complain about not being able to focus on their academic lessons under the current madhouse regime.

    Why, "holding kids back" would devastate their precious "self-esteem," while allowing kids to "skip ahead" would devastate all the educrats' carefully crafted schemes of "socialization"!

    Funny. Given how quickly "socialization" always trumps rapid academic progress, you have to wonder why the teachers' union isn't called the "Nevada State Socialization Association"; why the biennial tax allocation for schools isn't called the "Socialization Funding Bill"; why Gov. Gibbons doesn't proudly proclaim himself "The Socialization Governor."

    Vin Suprynowicz is assistant editorial page editor of the Review-Journal and author of the novel "The Black Arrow." See www.vinsuprynowicz.com/.

    Newsvine Digg Fark Technorati reddit StumbleUpon del.icio.us Slashdot Propeller Mixx Furl Twitter MySpace Facebook Google Bookmarks Yahoo! Bookmarks Windows Live Favorites Ask MyStuff myAOL Favorites

    Leave Your Comment 18 Reader Comments
    Terms & Conditions
    The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. The reviewjournal.com does not review comments before publication nor guarantee their accuracy. By publishing a comment here you agree to abide by the comment policy. If you see a comment that violates the policy, please notify the web editor.

    Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 48 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.
    Current Word Count:

    Note: Comments made by reporters and editors of the Las Vegas Review-Journal are presented with a yellow background.

    Report abuse

    Bill Smith wrote on April 10, 2008 04:13 AM: Home schooled children get a hundred times more socialization than their government propaganda camp counter parts. They socialize with all ages of people in varying activities throughout the day. The government ones just get a certain age group. You are right Paolo. I don’t consider bullying, gang fights, drugs, rape, and loss of basic privacy socialization. Next people will be screaming to microchip our kids like they want us to be forced to microchip our pets.


    Report abuse

    Paolo wrote on April 09, 2008 07:04 PM: A rather disturbing discussion I've had with several public school supporting parents regards this weird concept of "socialization" to which Vin refers.

    As a home schooling parent, I have pointed out to many parents how "socialization" in public schools often amounts to bullying and being bullied, getting into fights, going along with the pack, and so forth.

    The response I usually get is that involvement in bullying and fighting is somehow "good" socialization for the kids. This is usually followed by a statement like, "they gotta learn to stick up for themselves some day. This helps them become strong adults."

    I beg to differ, to say the least. Bullying and being bullied does not make anyone "stronger." Getting into fights also does not make one "stronger." If someone said schools taught how to stay out of fights, I might be more impressed--but probably not.

    Do we wonder why we live in a society in which six teenage girls beat up a helpless classmate, and then proudly post the video (made with multiple cameras to capture every glorious, gory angle) on You-Tube? It's that great "socialization" we get at the propaganda camps.


    Report abuse

    Paolo wrote on April 07, 2008 05:54 PM: I think what Vin was saying in this editorial boils down to: "IF we tried to run the propaganda camps in a sensible way, here is how we should do it."

    However, Vin would probably also agree that the changes he recommends could not be made; the educational system would resist such changes to the bitter end.

    You can't "reform" the public schools in any meaningful way, when the whole premise behind public education--that we must steal from all taxpayers to support a gigantic indoctrination system--is wrong.

    In a free society, all education would be privately funded and attendance would be voluntary (the same as all other products and services).


    Report abuse

    Bill Smith wrote on April 07, 2008 04:40 AM: This time I do not agree with Vin, but I would find this more tolerable than the current system.
    I see the thieves, as usual, are out in force again in the comments section. They just love to have wealth stolen from others to pay for their socialization.


    Report abuse

    Steve wrote on April 06, 2008 05:29 PM: I see major practical problems with any scheme which would permanently expel eight-year-olds solely for failure to "master the material".
    What would be done with such children, assuming that parents are unwilling/unable to send them to private schools? They would tend to grow up illiterate, and find it very difficult to function in society. At the very least, there would need to be some provision for a "second chance".


    Report abuse

    Tom Atreides wrote on April 06, 2008 04:26 PM: I agree this time, Vin. We do need to stop the social promotion and to stop giving free education to the unworthy. I teach high school, and many of my "non-college-bound" students would agree with this stance.

    The only problem with this model, and it's one for which a conscientious educational establishment can control, is that often in the 1950s and 1960s, poor and minority students were disproportionately tracked into vocational programs and away from college-prep ones. Of course, this unfortunately happens now too but at, I believe, lower rates. Education should not be used to perpetuate, or even exacerbate, class disparities--which have grown worse in the last three decades.

    Perhaps, if this system were put into practice, the cut-off scores should be adjusted by school or by community, or else we'll have the vast majority of kids from rich, white schools in Connecticut, Henderson, and Summerlin being labeled "college-bound" while poor, minority students from North, West, and East Las Vegas being labeled "vocational."

    However, if we can control for some of these factors, we ought to be able to stop throwing good money at bad students.

    One question for Vin, if he reads these: what to do about the Special Education students? On average, the government spends two-to-three, and sometimes as much as five times as much on students with special needs as it does future surgeons, lawyers, engineers, educators, etc. What would Vin do? What would Vin do if he had a student with Autism, Mental Retardation, etc?

    Once again, though, I agree. We throw a lot of good money at bad students.


    Report abuse

    Paolo wrote on April 06, 2008 04:25 PM: The "socialization" aspect of our Prussian-style educational system (imported from Germany by Horace Mann and others in the 19th century) is the most crucial aspect, from the view of the state.

    The Germans, through their new educational system, turned the nation of Goethe and Beethoven into the nation of Bismarck and Hitler. Their students were thoroughly "socialized"; that is, they were indoctrinated to be loyal and obedient to state authority. This made them better soldiers and factory workers.

    In about the same time frame (about a century and a half), our school system has accomplished the same "socialization."


    Report abuse

    sick of socialism wrote on April 06, 2008 03:42 PM: Midwestern transplant,

    Why can't you socialists be content with the large chunk of the world you already have? Please move to one of the existing socialist paradises and leave us radicals alone.


    Report abuse

    MIdwesterntransplant wrote on April 06, 2008 02:42 PM:
    Wow.. what an embarassing piece of tripe. The RJ should be ashamed to publish this nonsense. But, Vegas is the only major city without a real newpaper--instead we get this libertarian propoganda dirtrag. How many times does America have to reject the nonsense ideas of Libertarians before they go away?


    Report abuse

    KD wrote on April 06, 2008 01:04 PM: Not only would this education plan match practices prior to 1950, it would match plans prior to 1970. I escaped from public education in 1968. I was in "tracked" junior high and high schools. Students with no plans for college were in vocational tracks. Those wishing extra science and math were in pre-college fast tracks. Students were not all in the same tracks for every course. You could take Advanced English and Basic Algebra; Advanced Physics and Basic History. My favorite class ever was a sixth grade reading course where we read on our own, tested on our own, and advanced as fast as we were able. I feel badly about current educational experiences. If I were in public schools now I might be a slacker/dropout with zero motivation. I know I would be bored with "keeping down" with the rest of an average class. Educrats have destroyed generations of bright students without helping average students at all.


    Read All Comments