Some of you have probably read about the proposed Oklahoma Catholic charter school, which would be tax supported:
I know we have discussed the subject of public funding of religious schools before. Most of us would at least see some potential problems. But that is not the subject I primarily wish to discuss. What I want to discuss is the fact that this school would be virtual. But first bear with me for a bit while I excerpt some background information from the NCR article;
"Catholic leaders in Oklahoma are proceeding with plans to operate the nation's first taxpayer-funded religious public charter school, which critics and some legal scholars say violates the U.S. Constitution's prohibition against the government establishing or sponsoring religion.The constitutionality of St. Isidore Virtual Catholic Charter School is the subject of lawsuits in two Oklahoma state courts. Several observers expect the matter will eventually be heard in the federal courts, with a strong likelihood that the U.S. Supreme Court will be asked to decide a case that could have significant ramifications for the separation of church and state."
"...In the case of St. Isidore, the Supreme Court may have to determine whether or not a religious organization becomes an arm of the state if it receives public funds to operate a public charter school. Attorneys for St. Isidore argue in court documents that the charter school is akin to a private contractor in the same way that religious agencies contract with the government to provide various social services such as refugee resettlement and foster care placement."
"...Approved by a state education board last summer amid significant controversy, St. Isidore Virtual Catholic Charter School is set to open this year as a K-12 public school that would educate students in underserved Oklahoma rural counties while also being described as a "place of evangelization" that "participates in the evangelizing mission of the Church."
"In their application to the Oklahoma Statewide Virtual Charter School Board, the state's Catholic leaders said St. Isidore will be a Catholic school operated "in harmony with faith and morals, including sexual morality, as taught and understood by the Magisterium of the Catholic Church based upon Holy Scripture and Sacred Tradition."
"In an article posted by the University of Notre Dame Law School — the law school's Religious Liberty Clinic is representing St. Isidore in court — Coakley said the school will provide an educational foundation for Oklahoma families who "do not currently have access to a rigorous, integrated, and authentically Catholic education that forms the whole person."
As a personal note, I don't have a problem with "limited partnership" sorts of things between religious and public schools. Going back as far as the 1960s, religious schools in some states were furnished with some text books from the state for non-religious subjects such as math. Locally the Catholic and public school systems have had partnerships in sponsoring things such a swim team or other sports. The religious schools here have access to a speech and hearing teacher from the public school for students who have problems in those areas.
I also don't have a problem with scholarship funds for private schools being tax deductible as a charitable donation (as opposed to tax credits, which are a whole other subject).
The things I have problems with are two red flags. The first is this one: "St. Isidore Virtual Catholic Charter School...being described as a "place of evangelization" that "participates in the evangelizing mission of the Church." and "...St. Isidore will be a Catholic school operated "in harmony with faith and morals, including sexual morality, as taught and understood by the Magisterium of the Catholic Church based upon Holy Scripture and Sacred Tradition."
They are saying openly and out loud that their goal is evangelism and teaching Catholic doctrine. That is not the purview of public education.
The second red flag is that this school is to be virtual. As I am understanding it, classes would not be taught in person (I am assuming online?). There is no mention of a physical school building. Which means that the school would not be dedicated to a geographical location. Theoretically the State of Oklahoma could be paying for students from other states. The NCR article states that the "board" for this school would be the bishops of Oklahoma. I don't see how that parses with the idea of public education.
I am not aware that there are other virtual charter schools supported by public funds. Maybe some of you would have heard of that? I am very surprised that there has been no discussion of this school being basically like Khan Academy, and not existing as a physical entity. One of the things we found out during the pandemic is that kids don't do well long term when school isn't in-person. We had to get through a rough patch for a while, but they really do need social connection and interaction, and engagement with real teachers to do their best learning.
Any thoughts?
I think Virtual Schools are a great idea; the more school choice the better. No one should be stuck with trying to learn from mediocre teachers, with dumb or bullying classmates, and just the help of parents.
ReplyDeleteLearning is a life-long process which the internet has brought home to everyone with access to a computer. Everyone should have the opportunity to learn at their own pace, in their own ways, and with their own interests and talents to guide them.
The only fly in this particular proposal is that it might not be a real choice. Are these rural kids going to have competing choices? As long as families have real choices, I think that religious educators should be free to be themselves.
The pandemic was an extraordinary situation and likely provides little or no information about virtual schools. School districts, teachers, students and parents were simply not set up to deal with virtual education.
DeletePublic education in the U.S. is poor overall (lots of exceptions in wealthy burbs, of course) and seems to be on the wane.
ReplyDeleteHowever, it is being replaced by any number of even worse alternatives. One of those awful options, imo, is virtual learning, which may be fine for a percentage of self-motivated kids with attentive parents. But quality varies wildly.
Most alternatives to public education are not subject to parental control. If your kid goes to religious school outside your parish, a school of choice in another district, a virtual school, or a for-profit charter, you typically do not get to elect or serve on their boards. And if your kid's school gets total or partial public funding, you basically have taxation without representation.
Given that we seem to be dismantling public education in favor of a competitive marketplace of educational options, it seems sensible to eliminate school taxes and let parents "vote" with their money. Once schools receive no public funds, they are no longer subject to constitutional considerations.
I think the demise of public education will deepen divides and hasten the union's ultimate demise. But I think that's inevitable in any case.
Ohio has a free virtual public school. Looks interesting to me.
ReplyDeletehttps://ohva.k12.com/
If I were a parent, I would be very hesitant to entrust my kid to the local schools no matter how well they are rated, but I also would be skeptical of the amount of time I would have to put into home schooling.
This place seems to have a reasonable basic structure but also flexibility. If your kid is in fourth grade but reads at the third or sixth grade level, they adapt.
I suspect there is not enough of this out there that it yet provides what I really want in terms of diversity and flexibility. But it seems a start.
I hated school all my life from grade school through graduate school. Got them to adapt to me a little bit. I think education needs far more reforming than the church and healthcare. In my experience with large institutions, educational ones are the least accountable.
You and I disagree. But so as not to throw the discussion off track too much, I will concede that virtual education works well for kids who find the social aspects of the classroom difficult to navigate, for kids in subjects that require memorization and regurgitation of facts and lower level analysis, and for kids who need enrichment in an area where they are ahead of their classmates.
DeleteHigher critical thinking skills still depend largely on a "live" teacher somewhere behind the screen who provides individual encouragement and can play devil's advocate.
Jack, it's interesting that Ohio has a free virtual public school. I can see where that would be an advantage for some kids, such as the ones who have a chronic illness where they would end up missing a lot of regular school. And definitely if a kid was getting bullied and the school wouldn't do anything about it, it would be better if they had a virtual option. One size doesn't fit all.
DeleteTax money should not be used to support religious schools, whether virtual or brick and mortar. This school will teach, for example, that homosexual marriage is a sin, that divorce and remarriage without annulment is a sin, that females are inferior to men and are denied a sacrament because of this view - etc, etc, etc. Muslim schools might teach that Christians are infidels. Etc, etc. If Catholics don’t support their own schools why should non- Catholics be forced to support them?
DeleteAmerica Media ran an article touching on this subject and I commented. Basically I asked if those in favor of tax support going to religious schools would be okay with it going to fundamentalist Christian schools that taught that the earth is 6000 years old, or neo-pagan schools, or schools of sects which were basically a cult. Sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.
DeleteThe problem is that public schools are not religiously neutral.
ReplyDeleteThey were not religiously neutral when I went to them as a child. Beginning the day with bible reading and prayer (even if that merely meant that one bowed one’s head in silent prayer) was definitely Protestant. Most of my teachers were members of mainline Protestant churches, e.g. sang in the choir. We also had an optional Protestant Graduation Service. It was very clear to me that if you wanted a Catholic education you needed to go to a Catholic school (which I eventually did when I went to College).
Initially I approved of the decision to eliminate prayer in public schools. However, by the nineties it became clear that the Protestant establishment had been replaced by a secular establishment that denied the existence of religion. The artwork of Painesville public schools was exhibited in the local post office. Winter and Spring were celebrations of the seasons of the year without the slightest references to Christ, Christmas or Easter. Again, the clear message, if you want a Catholic education you need to go to a Catholic school.
Now it seems to me that public schools exist to provide a common set of experiences in the skills of reading, writing, arithmetic, computing, music, and the arts that help us all to interact with each other. They need to have a common curriculum supported by a set of similar books that people can agree upon.
I have no complaint about religious organizations enhancing the common core with reading, writing, computer resources, music and art from their own tradition if the religious organization pays for that portion of the curriculum. The supplementary materials would also have to be certified by the public schools as meeting certain standards, e.g. Catholic history as something that all scholars agree is a reasonable account without prejudice against other religions.
We need to welcome religious beliefs and practices into the public square and provide opportunities for people to become better acquainted with other religions.
"They need to have a common curriculum supported by a set of similar books that people can agree upon." The inability of people to agree on a common curriculum is exactly the problem right now. Legislatures, activist groups, and individuals fueled by lies they hear in church are bombarding local boards and state boards of education with competing and irreconcilable demands. Where they don't get their way, they start charters, religious, or home schools. The responsible thing to do is to try to make the demise of public education as orderly as possible.
DeleteThe argument could be made that it was the public school system, especially the high schools that made America Great. I would hope that we have enough wisdom and prudence left in our country that we will try to save them. They were never perfect, but what I experienced was sufficient to get me on to my own choices afterwards.
DeleteAs I said above, I think a virtual public school system does not have to be a one size fits all that is very dependent upon the local tax base, and the whims of its school board.
A virtual system could not only provide sufficient diversity to accommodate personal needs it could provide sufficient diversity to attract Catholics and others rather than having them set up their own physical structures and curriculums.
The central political problem is not that people want different things from public education, it is that they want to impose on other people their vision of what the public school should be doing. We no longer want the freedom to live and let live; many even most want to impose their way of living on others.
Jack, I think you are right that public education is worth saving. Even if public schools aren't perfect, they have accomplished a lot of good. For that matter no schools are perfect. And you also are right about some people wanting to impose their vision on others.
DeleteWe are seeing a lot of articles lately about poor attendance of a lot of students post-pandemic. Maybe a virtual public school option could engage some of the students who are "quiet quitting" for one reason or another.
As Katherine noted, there are two issues: Is virtual education worth spending public funds on? And is it constitutional to fund a Catholic curriculum with evangelization as a stated goal?
ReplyDeleteOn virtual education: My skepticism about virtual curriculum comes from tutoring college students struggling with virtual courses and from teaching a hybrid (part virtual) class. As I have experienced them, these courses require above-average reading skills and leave students without a "real" person to augment explanations. Kids with superior language skills do okay, but instructors end up offering explanations via email 30 times to each individual vs once to the whole class.
Students with attention problems (which is most of them), just don't want to read carefully and are constantly emailing instructors to ask for quicker versions of the lesson.
Sometimes instructional designers write most of the virtual lessons and assignments. The idea is to reduce variation in instruction that occurs when more than one prof teaches the course. The problem is that instructional designers are not subject matter experts and they often produce hard-to-follow info. Sometimes the prof himself is stymied.
Virtual courses usually relegate teachers to lecturers (via video presentation) or monitors (checking to see that students have completed online assignments time stamps to due dates and grading essays.
At the small private college where I taught, the college wanted to record our lectures to weave into their virtual courses. You get fired and the college continues to make money off you in video form.
Virtual courses also require consistent internet access and a quiet place to concentrate. Many struggling students don't have that. Poor students in rural areas may have spotty internet connections. And, as someone who grew up in a chaotic family, I would not have had the luxury of an interruption-free chunk of time. I didn't love school, but it was a place that was drama free and the adults weren't drunk and crazy.
On constitutionality: I am against paying for any form of religious proselytizing with public funds. I hope the Okla deal is challenged.
Jim, the subsidies to religious schools in Europe are a legacy of state religion. Fleeing religious tyranny is one reason people came to America and enshrined separation of church and state. England still imposes Anglicanism on anyone marring a high level Royal. Meghan Markle for example.she was Catholic but became Anglican. No taxes to subsidize religion.,
ReplyDeleteJim, you’re rationalizing betraying the principle of separation of church and state which has served America well. Frankly I don’t agree that these schools necessarily teach children to be good citizens. When they teach that gay marriage is wrong,they plant seeds of prejudice and even hate. When they teach that women must be subservient to men, they are sowing misogyny, and in some cases, lay the foundation for abuse of women. When they teach that the Catholic pope is the anti- Christ they are teaching religious hatred. When they teach that the earth is 6000 years old they are inculcating falsehoods and scepticism of science. They are fostering ignorance. There are many examples I could give, but taking money from public schools who have to educate all to fund private, religious schools is just plain wrong, and it’s immoral in some cases.
ReplyDeleteIt's not the state's business to dictate that schools must teach that gay marriage is good (or bad), or that wives subordinating themselves to their husbands is bad (or good).
DeleteJim, it IS the state’s business to ensure that taxpayer funded schools don’t teach ideas that violate protections for various minorities, such as gays, nor foster ideas that might lead to violence, such as teaching that females are to be subservient to males. The state makes and enforces the various equal rights laws meant to protect people, including protecting students against being taught ideas that lead to bigotry. Frankly, I don’t care what Canada and the UK do as a legacy of their religiously intolerant histories. Why not look at France instead?
DeleteI'll support any school that teaches cursive. The idea of human writing communication and records being totally dependent on cyberspace scares the hell out of me. As dependent on the inyernet as I have become, I am not comfortable with it.
ReplyDeleteStanley, I agree with you about being too dependent on cyberspace for the storing of records and important documents. And for that matter, works of literature and communication. We talk about saving and backing up files on computers. We need to back up "the cloud" by physical files of important things.
DeleteAnd how will we do historical research in the future without access to letters and journals? I saved letters from my parents and grandparents, I don't know, seeing their handwriting makes me feel still connected to them..
My librarian friends digitize things. This makes facsimiles of rare books available to more people, and prevents overhandling that damages the original. I scanned all the family photos and letters I had before offering them to other family members. The younger ones only wanted digital copies. My brother took some paper copies, and I threw out the rest. I am not very sentimental about stuff, but I did cut signatures out of the old Xmas cards and made ornaments out of them. It makes me happy to hang little tags that say "Merry Christmas, Love Grandma" and similar in the sender's handwriting.
DeleteRe: the established churches of Europe, that has not helped them remain committed to their religious traditions. I'm told that only about 5% of Danes are practicing church members, for instance. We're not great at that here, but we do better than that. In Germany, where the churches get government support, there are people who officially "cancel" their Baptism because they resent tax money going to something they don't take part in.
ReplyDeleteIf we've done okay with our admittedly flawed system, do we really want to change things up?
I don't think we need to get too hung up on established churches. Canada (at least six out of the 13 provinces) and the UK subsidize Catholic schools, although the Catholic church certainly isn't the established church in either country. The US can fund schools with religious missions without establishing a church.
ReplyDelete