WGBH Radio; The Callie Crossley Show

I'm Cally Crossley This is the Cali Crosland show. A new law in New Hampshire is giving parents control over the classroom. Schools are now required to create alternatives to any lesson that a parent dislikes whether it's Thomas Jefferson or Tom Sawyer. Critics say this undermines the public purpose of public schools to provide common ground in the classroom. A customized classroom would not only further divide kids. It would also put an enormous burden on overworked teachers who will have to develop separate coursework. Proponents say this is a necessary change in our inefficient one size fits all approach to education. Taylor teaching acknowledges the diversity and varying needs of the student body. Does this all a carte approach turn schools into a private right instead of a public good. Or do these accommodations address the realities of the 21st century classroom. Up next. Rocking the school. First the news. From NPR News in Washington I'm Lakshmi saying members of Congress are

tearing into copies of President Obama's 2013 budget which seeks four trillion dollars in deficit reductions over the next decade through government cuts and an end to certain tax breaks for the wealthiest Americans. I don't need a tax break. We don't need to be providing additional tax cuts for. Folks who are doing really really really well. The president speaking today in a northern Virginia College about his plan which is not expected to get far this election year Republican critics are firmly opposed to any tax hikes. Greece still faces more obstacles before it can secure an international bailout to avoid default next month while the European Union says it's encouraged that the Greek parliament pushed through tougher austerity measures this morning the continent's largest economy Germany. Says it would rather delay approving anything until it sees a clear path for Greece's rescue. We have details from NPR's Eric Westervelt. Germany's economy minister Philip Roessler told German TV today that the Greek vote was a step in the right

direction but that Germany still needs to quote wait and see what comes now after the legislation. Germany's finance minister of Wolfgang Schaeuble was tougher saying Greece has been quote a bottomless pit and that Greek promises of austerity are no longer good enough because so many pledges have been broken. European finance ministers will now meet in Brussels on Wednesday. They're demanding that by then Greece find more than 400 million dollars more in budget savings and they want commitments that Greek politicians will follow through on the terms of the deal after upcoming elections. With growing social unrest and anger in Greece there is deep concern. Greek politicians will block it implementing the required reforms. Eric Westervelt NPR News Berlin. Operations are back to normal at the Netherlands Schiphol Airport one of Europe's busiest aviation hubs. Authorities say they've arrested a man who claimed to have a bomb to terminals had to be evacuated and numerous flights were delayed. Afghan officials say they have arrested two 10 year old suicide bombers in southern Afghanistan. NPR's Ahmad Shafi reports the two children had been arrested last

year but they were pardoned and released by Afghanistan's president last August. The two children were arrested in the southern city of Kandahar as they were preparing to blow themselves up. Afghan officials say they had gone to Pakistan after President Karzai pardoned them last year. One of the children says his teacher said the Pakistani religious school told him to go back inside Afghanistan and attack Afghan NATO troops. A spokesman for President Karzai says the government might build separate schools for children who are trained and encouraged by the insurgents to become suicide bombers. Meanwhile coalition officials say a NATO soldier died in an insurgent attack in southern Afghanistan. No other details have been provided much Shafi NPR News Kabul. Dow is up nearly 70 points at twelve thousand eight sixty nine. This is NPR News. And from the WGBH radio news room in Boston I'm Christina Quinn with the local stories we're following. The lawyer of James Whitey Bulger told the court today that he needs another year to review a tsunami's worth of evidence that has been turned over by prosecutors meaning the

gangster will not be ready to stand trial anytime soon. The Boston Globe reports that in a memorandum filed this morning Bulger's attorney J.W. Carney Jr. also indicated that Bulger may challenge some of the government's claims about his role as a longtime FBI informant. CARNEY And prosecutors are due in U.S. district court in Boston this afternoon to update U.S. Magistrate Judge Marianne bowler on the status of the case. The Red Sox and David Ortiz avoided an arbitration hearing today by settling on a one year deal. Red Sox general manager Ben Cherington tells The Boston Globe that when the two sides met face to face they were able to agree on the midpoint of the two figures which were twelve point six five and sixteen point five million dollars. Sherrington says Ortiz's rays should not affect any impending moves the team is trying to make. Massachusetts gas prices have soared another seven cents in the past week and have no risen for eight consecutive weeks. Triple-A southern New England reports that self-serve regular has jumped to an average of 356 per gallon. That's 16 cents higher than a month ago and a nickel above the

national average. Rhode Island lottery officials are still waiting for the winner to claim the three hundred thirty six point four million dollar prize from Saturday's Powerball jackpot. They say the ticket was sold at a Stop and Shop supermarket in Newport. A lottery spokeswoman says the jackpot is the sixth largest in U.S. history. Sunny skies in the forecast for this afternoon it will be windy with highs in the upper 30s and tonight will be mostly clear with temperatures dipping into the mid 20s. Right now it's 39 degrees in Boston 41 in Worcester and 40 in Providence. Support for NPR comes from the mosaic foundation of Rita and Peter Haden based in Ann Arbor honoring the passion of public radio listeners all across America who support their NPR member stations. I'm Christina Cohen. You'll find more news at WGBH news dorg. Good afternoon I'm Cally Crossley. Today we're talking about education with a focus on New Hampshire. The states passed a law that gives parents the power to opt their kids out of a class if they object to what's being taught in the

classroom. Later in the hour we'll talk to some big thinkers on education. But first we turn to our New Hampshire insiders for a look at how and why this bill was passed. I'm joined by Arnie Arneson and Fergus Cullen. Arnie Arneson is a radio and TV commentator Fergus Cullen is a public affairs consultant former chair of the New Hampshire Republican Party and an editorial page columnist with The New Hampshire Union Leader. Welcome back you to. Hey I guess that makes us a little thinker something that I'm going to take a peek. You got it you took it away from you that's right. When we're talking political contacts What can I say. Actually I just want to read what this bill says I have a copy of the bill is now law it says that which became law by the way January 1st of this year. This bill requires school districts to adopt a policy allowing an exception to specific course material based on a parents or legal guardians determination that the material is objectionable. So what I want to hear from you too is what was the

political context about how this bill came to be how this law came to be now. Well let me let me start off. I'll take the burden away from you for good. First of all you need to know Cali that the original iteration of this bill which actually passed the House of Representatives was a bill to and completely compulsory education to end compulsory education. In other words kids could drop out at age five. OK. It passed the house it went to the set at the ending of compulsory education and the Senate went and they decided that they were going to table the bill and maybe look at it later. Well the later version of the bill is the bill that you are now describing which instead of allowing kids to you know not be forced to go to school. Now parents can pick and choose classes that they do not want their kids to participate in based on some sort of conscientious objection.

Now the problem is I called someone up and I said what does that mean. And they said I don't know. I said OK we don't know what that means. So that means basically whatever they want on any kind of course material whether it's phonics whether it's not teaching evolution whether it means they don't like to learn about the French Revolution because they don't like France. They can then remove their child from that academic setting and then require the school to come up with another curriculum that will meet the approval of the parent. Now here's the interesting kicker. Every single school district has to come up with a program in order to figure out how the parents are supposed to approach the administration and approach the school. So figure there is I don't know how many you know maybe 100 200 school district that. Each school district or school is going to have to come up with some sort of program so the parents know how to challenge of a classroom setting. Then they have to come up with the alternative classroom material. But here's the good news. The parents have

to pay for the alternative classroom education. Now my question is when does the clock start for pay. Do they pay for the administration. Do they pay for the materials. Do they pay for the teacher. Do they pay for the heat for the extra room where they have to teach the student. And imagine that happening. Not one but potentially hundreds of times because parents can do that for any class in any school at any grade level. So Ferguson was there stirrings among parents saying we don't like what you don't like the teachers we don't like the good regular. So that got it legislators. Please step in and give us some power what was you know legislators typically don't just come up with something you know somebody has been talking to them. So what are they saying. You know there wasn't there was an incident that came up the search triggered the law and the one thing to fill in a couple of blanks in our new discussion. It did become law over the

governor's veto and even the attempt to override failed the first time and only when it was reconsidered that it passed. So this was not something that had exactly universal support becoming law. But the incident that triggered the original law was not what you might have expected. It was not a disagreement about say the teaching of the education or the teaching of creationism or about something dealing with religion. It was about the teaching or inclusion of a book called Nickel and Dimed in the curriculum at a high school in Bedford or Manchester about a year ago now nickel and dimed you know the most controversial thing that can be said about this book is probably people like me think that it basically has an anti-capitalist method. But you know not poor people are not the 1 percent. Well you know it's one it's one that you know again people like me basically think it's not exactly a pro-capitalism book but nonetheless it was not an especially controversial. A parent did object to that and that

controversy is I think what led to the creation of this particular bill. And let me just say one more thing here though Kelly. Parents have always been able to raise questions about content to raise questions about books. And in fact we have seen that books have been removed that people have decided to alter the curriculum for that year. So there is always been a mechanism available usually as as you heard from Ferguson It deals with sex education or health education. But even in this situation there was some sort of relationship and the child was able to opt out. So that's been available. But look at this this bill is taking that position and putting it on steroids. And as someone whose kids have gone to public school and as the daughter of two public school teachers it is a potential nightmare. What could happen. Because if you just have two kids in one class and then four kids in one class how the heck does anyone actually conduct a classroom discussion or education when they have

22 kids to worry about. But now four separate programs for four separate kids in one particular. Setting Well you look at me that very difficult. That's very unlikely to happen I'm just in the really wanting it well yes technically I probably guess it could but in the minimal pollution in search of a problem I mean it gets to a fundamental now. Yeah I agree with that. It gets to a fundamental tension about public education and that is who is in charge. Is that the school district or is it the parents. And you know I'm a product of public schools like coats in public schools. And you know my oldest child is a second grader a public school. But I can understand why parents aren't always comfortable with public school. They tend to teach to the middle. And you know to a certain extent whenever we as parents send our children off to public schools or private schools for that matter we're feeding a great deal of control over their education to somebody else. And for most parents it's fair to say we're happy doing that. A smaller number of parents might have been reluctant at

some level about doing that. And this law sort of tries to give a little bit of power and a little bit of control back to some of those parents who might have some of those kinds of concerns. Fergus Are you aware of other like bills in other states in other words did the sponsors I think is representative whole and Mer did they see this happening elsewhere and said This is a solution. Or was this wholly born in New Hampshire. Well I think it's fair to say that New Hampshire's legislature is a little bit unique. It is one Republican right now and the majority of that majority involves a lot of folks who I think would be safe to describe as Tea Party Republicans. Relatively new activists the House in particular very conservative. But this does tend to break ground on top of the other states. I think something that more has come up in Arizona. But the issue about parents wanting to opt out or question aspects of curriculum that comes up you know in every state. Moment time again we're used to it I think in the context of religion

or perhaps sex education in school but you know remember parents do have other choices. Most of the time if you really are concerned about your public schools you always have the home schooling option. You have the choice about going to a private school maybe one that has a religious affiliation maybe one that would be considered secular. But for parents who are saying look for whatever reason I'm still choosing to go with the public school system. Again this is designed to give them a little bit more flexibility a little bit more control. I think it's a bit of much ado about nothing. No one's going to object to a Shakespeare reference. But they could and that will tell and let me just stop for just being very polite. I will be less polite. And there are 20 bills in this year alone that basically are anti public education. The sponsor of the bill that originally wanted to allow people to completely opt out of public. Education has between 25 and 30 bills in the hopper this year that cover every kind of possible extreme. And let me just read a line for Governor Lynch's betul message on this

bill. This is the veto message she put out on House bill 552 This is the veto message that was overridden by the House and the Senate. And this is what he says. This legislation in essence gives every individual parent of every student in a classroom a veto over every single lesson plan developed by a teacher. And the problem I have is is that this may be an opportunity for a handful of parents to then decide exactly how to micromanage what is taught to their child but in their attempt to basically serve their child and serve that parent they are undermining the vast majority of kids who go to school to learn because the administration will be spending way too much time basically massaging that parent and that child those teachers will be spending way too much time trying to figure out an alternative curriculum to basically deal with that parent and that child and who gets hurt. But the vast majority of kids and the public school taxpayer who wants a public

education. And a focus on something that will prepare them for the real world. The sponsor of the still home schooled his four children. That's part of his agenda. He wants his home school curriculum to become now the curriculum and public education. Sorry that should not fly in New Hampshire or any of the other states. Well to your point about that's interesting about the representative who home schools his kids. But as I understand home schooling and correct me if I'm wrong you are one of the advantages of course is that you can opt out of some objectionable Tiriel but there are certain common elements that you have to meet in order to pass the test for the kids to go on. So they can opt out of everything's as you know some point there has to be some coming together and testing about the common information that the kids have to know. So that's that I'm back to the the payment by the parents is paid for by the parent. Arnie Actually I had not thought about when does the Clark clock try to take it. And

exactly in terms of put it together but let's just assume that I read it. Just face value and said OK well the clock starts to tick when the kid is in the room with the extra whomever is conducting the class and I'm just trying to figure out where does the money come from to create a separate space even if even if the clock doesn't start till the parent is picking up the tab for the extra teacher you have to put it someplace gotta put make a space for them and then you tell me your people are broke there. I'm just really confused about this. Well first I don't know about you but I would be suing the pants off of any school administration because I would demand that that parent that want such separate curriculum have to stop have to pay for everything the toilet the life the administration the teacher the book the pencil the testing the hours on the phone. On everything and by the time they get done with calculating that Bill Calley you might as well send the kid to Phillips Exeter. It's going to be because

otherwise if you're not honest about the cost then any time or dollars spent on that particular child and that particular curriculum is a dollar and a dime and a time that's taken away from the rest of the public school kids and I think that is patently unfair. Well well when I had you first you didn't need this law to have a parent might have an objection to the sorts of disagreement that might happen with or without the law. I'm sure every administrator can tell you a story about you know the difficult parent or you know the parent who just couldn't be satisfied no matter what they tried to do. But I don't think this is going to suddenly create some kind of avalanche of problems that are going to cripple or bankrupt every public school system in New Hampshire. You know they're against parents. If a parent is fearful about matters of curriculum or reading assignment and they're looking for something there they're going to find something. Those parents are always going to exist and school districts have to deal with those you know those challenging personality sometime.

You know all the time. But this law doesn't really change anything in my view. Well I'll tell you one thing that it does change and that would be that people will be looking to New Hampshire to see how this is all going to play out in the coming months so I think both of you for weighing in on the political aspects of this bill. We have been talking about what's at stake if parents can control the classroom. And we've been talking about it with our big political thinkers our New Hampshire insiders Arnie Arnesen and Fergus Cullen thank you both. New Hampshire has passed a law that gives the parents the power to opt their kids out of a class if they object to what's being taught. Up next we continue the conversation with a focus on what this means for the future of education. We're opening up the lines at 8 7 7 3 0 1 8 9 7 8 7 7 3 0 1 89 70. Should parents be able to control the classroom. Does this approach turn school into a private right instead of a public good. 8 7 7 3 0 1 8 9 7 8 7 7 3 0 1

89 70. You're listening to WGBH Boston Public Radio. This program is made possible thanks to you. And Slavery by Another Name. Post emancipation era labor practices and laws effect created a new form of slavery in the south that persisted well into the 20th century. Watch Monday at 9:00 on WGBH too. And Welch and Forbes Welch and Forbes she's proud to be a multimedia sponsor on WGBH.

Charlie Curtis senior vice president and portfolio manager. I think people see Welch and Forbes has a firm with a high standard of integrity due to the relationship where the GBH family and where the shared common values to learn more visit WGBH dot org slash sponsorship. Actress Viola Davis has been nominated for an Academy Award for her portrayal of a maid in the 1960s era film the help she says she didn't see her character as a cliché. I saw her going on a journey. I saw her having humor and heart and intelligence. On the next FRESH AIR we talk with Davis joins us. This afternoon at 2 here on eighty nine point seven WGBH. Thanks to WGBH sustainers supporters who break their gifts down into monthly installments that automatically renews instead of hearing another fundraiser you're hearing more stories like this.

You and your sister couldn't tell us apart and we couldn't tell you two apart but by the end of this someone we had a double wedding joined thousands of WGBH sustainers with a gift of $5 a month and eighty nine point seven will say thanks with the all new CD from NPR's story core. All There Is Love stories here a sample of WGBH dot org. Morning essentially This is NPR News. Good morning from the WGBH Radio News I'm in Boston I'm Bobbsey was a smart choice to start your day above sea and morning in an eighty nine point seven. Welcome back to the Calla Crossley Show. If you're just joining us we're talking about education with a focus on New Hampshire. The states passed a law that gives parents the power to opt their kids out of a class if they object to what's being taught in the classroom. Joining me to talk about this and what it would spell for the future of education are Richard Kahlenberg and Neal McCluskey. Richard Kahlenberg is a senior fellow at the Century Foundation in Washington D.C. He's also the author of tough liberal

Albert Shanker and the battle over schools unions race and democracy. Neil McCluskey is associate director at the Center for Educational freedom at the Cato Institute in Washington D.C. He's the author of Feds in the classroom how big government corrupts cripples and compromises American education. Thank you both for joining us. Well thanks for having us. Thanks. You can join the conversation at 8 7 7 3 0 1 8 9 seventy 8 7 7 3 0 1 89 70. Parents and teachers who want to get your take on this 8 7 7 3 0 1. Eighty nine seventy eight 7 7 3 0 1 89 70. You can write to our Facebook page or send us a tweet. So gentlemen I would first like to just get your response to the bill to the law rather which took effect on January 1st of this year in New Hampshire. Neil McCluskey What do you think about it. Well looking at the law to me it appears to be pretty much unworkable especially if a lot of parents say they want something specifically tailored to their child.

But I think the idea that's behind it is moving in the right direction which is an acknowledgment that in our society which is very diverse people have different things they want of schools different things their kids are good at lots of different variables are involved in such a society you need a system of education where people can get different things. The best way to do that though is make a market out of education give parents public education money and let them choose schools so rather than one school having to cater to a multiplicity of different demands. Let us have individual schools that have specific focuses and then people who want that can go to that school. All right Richard Kahlenberg What do you think about it. Well I'll agree with Neal that I think the law is unworkable. But beyond that I think it's really in tension with the whole purpose of public education and public education is supposed to be about training democratic citizens in our

society small and the Democratic. That's right. Yes. And bringing people of different backgrounds together teaching them what it means to be an American. I think we want to try to keep parents happy of course. But there are other values at stake here beyond kind of maximizing consumer preferences. There are larger purposes to public education that I think are lost in in this legislation as was stated by my political contributors Arnie Arnesen and Fergus Cullen. Typically these kinds of arguments between parents and teachers. Focus on edges and sex education of some sort but this was not that these. There was some objection by parents one parent to a book called Nickel and Dimed by Barbara and then there was objection to another book called The crack cocaine diary or something. And both parents thought books too explicit in the case of Barbara.

The message about the working poor was OK with the parent but the parent was very unhappy with what she thought was very cavalier statements by Miss Iraq with regard to religion. So they came out and different reasons. Is it strong enough to just for objections to a book to change the whole system. This seems a little intense to me. But you know you're the educators and the education policy people. Has this happened in other communities where an objection to one book has led to a law that's similar in nature. Richard Kahlenberg I don't think we've seen anything quite as extreme as this law where a parent can object to any piece of the curriculum for any reason or in fact for no reason it's minors now they don't even have to give a reason for why they want an alternative for their students so this is unprecedented in my view. Having said that there are examples in the past of. Individuals who have been concerned about the curriculum and want to change it

for their children in Tennessee for example a number of years ago there were parents who objected to the teaching of The Diary of Anne Frank because they suggested to them that all religions are equal. They objected to the Wizard of Oz because that was discussing witchcraft I mean. So I don't think we want to get to the point in our public school system where we have to honor every single complaint that a that a parent might have there's a democratic process by which we can set curriculum and make decisions and I think that's if people have an interest in going elsewhere then they've got the private school option or the home school option and I think that's the that's striking the right balance in our society in my view. Neil McCluskey you suggested that there be a market made out of Education's appearance going to use you know the curriculum that might best suit them in terms of what they want for their

children. Should there in your plan be some common however subject matter or materials curriculum that exists at each of the schools even as parents may have some choice in the marketplace that you imagine. Well I think what we need to do is just look at reality and for one thing. Now I've never seen anything like the New Hampshire law I think this is very new and again I don't know that it makes a whole lot of sense but we see conflicts like this over this book constantly. The L.A. American Library Association puts out every year a list of of tens or hundreds of titles that are constantly being challenged in schools because again the reality is we have a very diverse populace and people want different things. What we've seen is even where you try and enforce a common standard in particular when we talk about evolution and creationism which you go back for almost a century and has been a huge flashpoint in our schools what ends up happening is you demand

it use you put it into standards. But we've seen in recent research that most biology teachers in high school are just ignoring it because it is too controversial. So the reality is if there are things most people agree on then with the market they're going to choose schools that teach that anyway things we don't agree on that are controversial. We end up with usually conflict and then conflict that if we resolve it within a one size fits all system often ends in the lowest common denominator curricula such as we see in biology class. I do want to emphasize that point that you just made about this research that a lot of teachers are self-censoring So they're avoiding teaching evolution because they don't want to engage in any controversy. With regard to creationism being taught or not taught in the particular place that they are so just. That's a point that I don't think a lot of people understand and that's one that folks should know about. Let me take some calls. Mark from Rhode Island Go ahead please you're on the callee Crossley Show.

Eighty nine point seven WGBH my school life history teacher and I I definitely believe. Things like this law really would create undue burden for a teacher right. You know I. I think most polls what it often is is a principal or administrator would leave it up to the teacher to come up with an alternative. We're doing it out of public school teacher at least in Massachusetts you can mop up horses 30 kids in a class time class six positive you know if you have less than a handful of students that would want this. I really do think if you create an undue burden it can tell I'm not a conspiracy theorist by the BS but it seems to me that the whole snow idea at least the extreme right. Their stated goal at least since I've been aware of. I'm not that old but. Class 20 here is to spend at least the downgrading of public education if not off by evolution of it. And this just seems to place an undue burden on schools that further that that that furthers that that goal of creating a situation

where it's untenable for a public school to function which then the answer then is well Bob just privatized everything in a spirit if there is but it just seems to be a little too convenient. These type of philosophy. Well Mark putting aside your conspiracy theories I'm just back at your point that you feel that the teachers would then be required in order to make this work to come up with whatever the alternate curriculum is. For those astute those parents who might opt out of their children which is something I had not considered I did you know it has not been explained. And both my guess by the way have said they think the bill is unworkable. But that's an interesting point so I thank you for your call. Thank you Laurie from Arlington Go ahead please you're on the callee Crossley Show eighty nine point seven WGBH. Thanks commuters just sounds like a return of segregation. If you want to learn one thing you couldn't at school when you're on the wrong thing to go to that school. You know it's saying that there's no way for us to have a common core of knowledge and that's

just fun. And that's the argument that's always been used against bringing different people together in the school. And it's almost like Google Now if you search for something it follows what you search it only brings up things you agree with the things you like. And that's just not what America is about. And we shouldn't be saying we can't teach everybody which is basically what the saying and since we can't teach you you got to your school for people like you. And that's that's just wrong. All right thanks for the call Laurie I'm going to let my guests weigh in on that. Richard Kahlenberg How do you respond to Laurie's point. Well I think Gloria makes a great point. I mean the the public schools are one of the few remaining institutions in our society where people of different backgrounds come together and learn. And we know we don't have the military draft which used to bring at least males of different backgrounds together and here we're so balkanized people get their news from different sources. They're they're galled off in their different neighborhoods.

Here's a way to to build a common knowledge among Americans. And that's that's very important. And the in the national newspaper I saw the Representative Holt said that he thought this would be a positive form of micro private schooling. And so I think that is. I mean your earlier caller mentioned this. I think that that is what this is about it's about privatization and. Undermining one of the few institutions we have that that teaches the teach common knowledge Neil. If you want to weigh in on it. Sure. The problem is that this idea that we bring diverse people together and we all just learn how to get along with them doesn't comport with reality. Historically and even today we know that there's huge segregation within schools based on where we choose to live and people choose to live with people just like themselves. We know historically that the way we've kept from having in some cases very divisive conflicts that just rip us further apart

is that our school system excluded people based on race. It potentially marginalized Roman Catholics where they had to start their own school system that at its peak was educating millions of people. We have this evidence that we can't get evolution taught in public schools because people just disagree and so I think the reality says this doesn't work this way and in fact there is lots of evidence that it causes us to fight with each other which is divisive because different people want different things from the schools and they're not just going to lay down their principles or their desires. To get comedy. The other thing that's important here is the basic most fundamental principle in which American society is based is individual freedom not control by government and I think that the idea that public education means government schools flies in the face of it. Well you know New Hampshire is definitely the Live Free or Die state as you know so I think some there would who are supporting this law are saying that this is the

ultimate expression of freedom. Let me ask this question because it was again brought up by both of both of my contributors Fergus Cullen and Arnie Arneson that the availability has always been there for people to home school if they really feel objection to the bulk of what's being taught in a public school setting. You home school but even within that context there are some common subject matter some common material that you have to teach the kids because they then have to go on to pass certain tests as I understand it later on. So why for those who really feel strongly about this why not home schooling as opposed to then saying I'm going to make you really focus all refocus and re adapt and adapt the situation in a public school. Neal. Well the answer most basically is that home schoolers pay taxes to support public schools. People go to private schools pay taxes to support the public schools so they have every right to say look if I have to support these schools I'm going to have a say in

what they do. And the fact the matter is what we're asking them to do is pay once for schools that don't teach what they want their children to learn and then we say oh if you don't like it go pay twice for education which is inherently unfair. And they still have every right to try and say how their money is used. That's my guess Neal McCluskey is the associate director at the Center for Educational freedom at the Cato Institute in Washington DC. Richard Kahlenberg How do you how do you respond to that. The home school in question. Right well I think that is a an important option in in our society we you know we're trying to create a balance here where. In most cases 90 percent of Americans send their children to public schools because they believe it's an important value in our society everyone has the same shot they can get to go to a public school. For those who want to opt out there is a constitutional right to do so you can send your child to private school you can home school your child. But it's interesting

when when the question that Neal has raised you know why should individuals who send their kids to private school have to pay twice when that that option is given. Should we have a system about churches where everyone gets to send their kid off to whatever school they want it could be you know a religious school might be a KKK school I mean who knows what would come out of this but. Every time the public has rejected that there have been nine or ten initiatives where the issue of vouchers has come up every time it's been rejected. Most recently it was rejected in Utah the most conservative state in the country. They said we don't want a system of private school vouchers we think there is value to having a system of public education in this country. And so I to my mind that's that's where we ought to be putting our efforts strengthening the public schools rather than diverting funding to a system of privatization.

That's my guess Richard Kellenberger He's a senior fellow at the Century Foundation in Washington. I'm Kelly Crossley and we're talking about education and what it means of parents get to control the classroom. I'm joined by Richard Kahlenberg and Neal McCluskey and you can join the conversation 8 7 7 3 0 1 8 9 7 8 8 7 7 3 0 1 89 70. You can write to our Facebook page and send us a tweet. Do you support parents getting the final say or should education be the public good. That's equally good for everyone. This is the Calla Crossley Show on WGBH Boston Public Radio. This program is on WGBH thanks to you. And Comcast Internet essential Internet Essentials is available to help families in need. Families with students qualified for free school lunches may be eligible for Internet Essentials.

You can learn more at Internet essential dot com. And the Harvard innovation lab a university wide center for innovation where entrepreneurs from Harvard the Austin Community Boston and beyond engage in teaching and learning about entrepreneurship. Information at I lab at Harvard dot edu. And Greenberg Traurig an international law firm with offices in Boston and more than 30 other cities worldwide addressing the complex legal needs of businesses from startups to public companies global reach local resources GTI law dot com. I'm Marco Werman The world is people the world through three days I guarantee you that we will be will be dead. The world is ideas. What can I do as a musician. At least I could do is to compose and go to concerts to support the people of Syria. Join us and hear the world. Coming up at 3:00 here on eighty nine point seven WGBH.

Travel back in time to the world of Edwardian England at the WGBH studios in Brighton on February 23rd at 6:30 p.m. takes some of the dishes served with the British aristocracy listen to the New England brass band as they bring the golden age of British music to life. Feast your eyes upon the fashions of the early 20th century and more. It's an evening inspired by Downton Abbey space is limited. Tickets are just $35 with a discount for members online at WGBH dot org slash box office. Great question and it's a great question and it's a great question. It's a great question. Rick great question on FRESH AIR feel here unexpected questions and unexpected answers this afternoon at 2:00 here on eighty nine point seven. WGBH. I'm Cally Crossley If you're just tuning in we're talking about education with a focus on New Hampshire. The states passed a law that gives parents the power to opt their kids out of a class if they object to what's being taught in the classroom. Joining me to talk about what this

could spell for the future of education are Richard Kahlenberg and Neal McCluskey. Richard Kahlenberg is a senior fellow at the Century Foundation in Washington D.C. and Neil McCluskey is associate director at the Center for Educational freedom at the Cato Institute in Washington D.C.. You can join us at 8 7 7 3 0 1 8 9 seventy 8 7 7 3 0 1 89 17 you can write to our Facebook page or send us a tweet. Here are some comments from the Facebook book page from Ken. I think it's perfectly fine I don't like all of the government intrusion in my life like the government knows better than I do about what is right for me or my children I seriously doubt it. As far as being equally good for everyone I think it would be even better if the government kept their hands out of it. And from Abby I think parents should definitely get the final say in their children's education. With that said I also believe that the teacher shouldn't have to provide alternate lesson plans if you don't want your child to read a book. Fine but they fail the book report exam except for your child doesn't have to take the science class but they

have to take the same in CAS science exam. Education is a public good. And if parents are unhappy with the curriculum then they can always home school or send their kids to private school. All right. Callers. Kathy from Plymouth Massachusetts you're on the callee Crossley Show. Eighty nine point seven WGBH go ahead. Hi Kelly. I'm a retired school teacher and I think what we've forgotten is that it's not that the it's not the content that is not the purpose of education the purpose is to teach our kids how to think of the content is the vehicle by which we teach students how to think. If you were to try to recall today what you you were taught in your freshman English class or your junior gets to class you couldn't today remember what that content was. But if you received an education you knew and learned how to think about that content just to draw similarities or differences between different dictators or to trace the development of a story with the crisis of the climax and the resolution. It doesn't

matter what the vehicle is. I have had a couple of students whose parents object to foul language and this is WGBH. Eighty nine point seven your source for local news and talk were Boston's NPR News and culture station. And he did feel isolated and and a little bit odd. But your parents you know tell me that what. Well we don't speak that way Michael. What I said. Well I don't either but I think we did. Well Cathy raises an interesting point Richard Kahlenberg and Neal McCluskey What do you how do you respond to that that content is really the vehicle by which kids learn how to think and so to object to certain content misses the point. Well if they if I can jump in and who's I think this is Richard Kahlenberg OK. I think that that's a very common view among

many educators I think it's I think the research suggests that it's that it's wrong that of course we want students to be skilled in critical thinking but they content matters a great deal. Hersh a University of Virginia professor has talked about the importance of learning. Content in reading comprehension that in fact what we teach children matters greatly because there are all sorts of cultural references which we take for advantage. Take for granted that make it difficult to understand even if one has reading skills to decode there. There's a body of knowledge that's important to give you one quick example. In the case of the parents who objects to the student reading Wizard of Oz you know what is that student to make of a reference to Mitt Romney as the Tin Man. I mean they they they just won't understand it and so having a

shared knowledge knowing our American history these sorts of things matter a skills level but also in forging a common identity as Americans. You agreed Neil content matters as much as it is not the vehicle by which solely by which students learn how to think. Well I think the evidence is that content matters but I think there's something much more important in what this caller has said. This is case in point of why you don't want a single system of government schools because look at how fundamental this question is do we teach critical thinking doing content. People have different beliefs about this and what we end up doing is fighting about it and then think of this. If this teacher is wrong and say it is important to focus on content but she is able to carry the day in the political argument that takes place to control the schools. If

she's wrong we will not be teaching kids across the board content that it turns out they need and we've seen examples of where we run into trouble when we let a state for instance dictate to all schools within that state you know kids what they'll learn. California adopted the whole language as their way of teaching reading. And the evidence suggests whole language did not work well in the whole state went down so in this call we've seen both an example of how we fundamentally disagree on very basic things in education and how when we put all our eggs in one basket that basket gets dropped everybody gets broken. All right. Shelley from Lexington Go ahead please. You're on the Goslee show. Hi I'm a physician and content matters and I'm very libertarian bent but I. Think there's an Iowa ideological expression being made you need to have certain education certain information is vital. For instance one can argue about the age appropriateness of sex education. I worked as a teacher a biology teacher.

But when when when Terrance in Connecticut where we were were allowed to withdraw their children from sex education. They never got the experience through high school leader shows. And this this is not an educational policy question. Data shows that those children's parents never teacher sex education and they are uninformed. So society I believe evolution the same think the parents can know what the curriculum is. The parents can discuss it at home and give their approach to to to. While you'd be evolutionary theory being taught in the classroom is wrong. But it's like you need a uniform approach towards a basic education. You can't take a teacher tried to shoot political worries what if parents object to the fact that it's not called the of the will of the state that it's called this or the Emancipation Proclamation has been offered differently. I mean you can't help parents with their ignorance often and not understanding what the total content the curriculum is making choices. If parents want to make choices pay current. School. But but

the educators should make the decision. It's not a parental think to decide what constitutes science one culture it's going to be worth cutters which are that they can do supplementary but that should not be in the school system and it should not be a political debate. It should be eight Democratic approach with the smoky and we should make compromises and and kids should learn what parents will want to be exposed to. So the parents have that as a template to teach the opposite if they care. But if children don't learn certain basic areas or even know people if you disagree with their beliefs because they've been sheltered you're doing at great disadvantage to society and to those with your children. All right Shelly Well thank you very much for the call. Neal you want to respond to that. Yeah I think again we have to look at reality and the reality is there are lots of people who will say that everybody needs to learn one thing or another but if we have disagreement and it's going to lead to conflict which it almost always does then what we see schools doing are

moving to the lowest common denominator not a place we can see this actually as in civics education where it appears private schools do a better job of teaching what we think of as good American civic values than public schools. And at least the theory has an I don't know that we have definitive proof of this but the theory is that because people choose those schools they can choose a coherent meaningful curriculum and not have to avoid things that are contentious. And the other thing I again did say was if we have disagreement about things and we're not omniscient. In other words we have disagreements because we don't have settled truth on all kinds of matters. Think of the danger of requiring everybody to learn something that's wrong and we can look at that whole language example if we want to or if you are inclined. If you're a big supporter of evolution then think of what would have happened if in the Scopes monkey trial era in the 1920s we had been able to you know the schools have been able to freeze out evolution from the schools and everyone be learning creationism which I think most scientists and many people would say is

not at all good science. Well I think some would say just that part of what you just said if it holds weight for people is that. And part of what some of the teachers have said is that if you teach kids critical thinking then whatever is is put on the table as common knowledge as information becomes available so now we know better or we know more and we can expand what's already on the table that they're able to use to apply critical thinking which they have been taught in schools by virtue of having a very diverse curriculum. So that they can then you know add to actually the expansiveness of their information and not not subtract and that a narrower curriculum guarantees that you go the other way. So I'm just putting on the table what I know that some people might say to your to your response Neal McCluskey But I I think it's interesting that there are a lot of people are focusing on the parents and whether their rights are

to adapt the curriculum and the educators. There's you know both of you are in educational policy. Now they're getting short shrift but I mean this is really how does a how does a teacher planning for a kind of arc of the conversation with kids for the year deal with this. And also what about teaching to the test some of this has to do with the fact that there would be lot of teachers would prefer to have a broader kind of coursework and curriculum. But there are some tests that these kids have to pass and they gotta make sure they teach two of them. Maybe I'm saying too much but that's this is what I hear from a lot of educators and I want to make sure that I got into the conversation so Richard you can take the first crack at what I've you know I think you make an excellent point I mean teachers are already feeling under a lot of pressure because they do need to have their children have their students perform well on. Standardized assessments. Now you're going to throw in in New Hampshire the

extra chaos of having to have an individual ised curriculum for each particular student. And this makes the it's the teacher's job even even more difficult. If I can also quickly add one thing in response to Neal I think the the whole school language issue that he brings up in California has some some merit to it there was we probably went down the wrong path. In California but at the same time I think it's a demonstration of the fact that the system worked I mean California changed its curriculum when evidence came in from 50 different states that were trying different things that that in fact there was it was better to use a combination of phonics and whole language to teach kids and so. Our in our democracy we are going to make mistakes periodically but the the whole genius of the system is that over time we generally get it more right than not. And rather

than leave it up to every parent each parent you know many of whom will will be ignorant of the of the research. We'd rather put this make these decisions as a society in a democratic way that that will will be based on the best evidence. Neal Well I mean I don't think that either rich or I disagree that this law doesn't seem to make any sense and I don't know how as a practical matter you can make a single teacher essentially split themselves into potentially you know 20 or 30 different teachers per class to teach something different. I think it's interesting though that that one of the things we do forget and it's I think it's true that we forget about the educators when we're talking about education and school choices. Many educators want to get out of the one size fits all framework that we have for public schooling but of course that is kind of the ultimate result is if you're not happy with your schools right now and you have local control if you can't leave them then you have

to go to state control and if you're not happy with what your state's doing you can't leave. You've got to go to federal control but then we get the stultifying one size fits all model that every teacher has to fit themselves into. And so I think teachers would be much better off if they could freely start their own schools or or tutoring or whatever they want to do and try different things and not be all in you know stuck in one system. And then I would also say that in the California example again I don't think that we have evidence that democracy changes and adjust and corrects faster than a free market does. It didn't take people long to stop buying. Buying and driving big cars when prices of gas went up but California lost lots and lots of kids and had to go through a long process of reforming laws which takes a long time on purpose in order to correct itself. Richard you get the last word.

Well I think Neal has raised a number of interesting points over this conversation that you know that our process of working out the hashing out these issues in our democracy is messy. There's a lot of division but it is our system and it and over the long haul it works quite well. That's why we still have 90 percent of Americans sending their children to public schools. And it's my hope that this New Hampshire law won't won't be another brick in the the efforts to tear down public education. Well one thing's for sure there is a lot of conversation about this bill and I will be keeping an eye on it as I'm sure you two will as well because it's unusual at this point I don't think anybody else is following them well. But wait to see what happens. Thank you both for your insightful comments in this discussion. We've been talking about education the role of public education with Richard Kahlenberg and Neal McCluskey. Richard Kahlenberg is a senior fellow at the Century Foundation in

Washington D.C. Neil McCluskey is associate director at the Center for Educational freedom at the Cato Institute in Washington D.C. You can keep on top of the Calla Crossley Show at WGBH dot org slash Calla Crossley follow us on Twitter or become a fan of the Calla Crossley Show on Facebook. Today's show was engineered by Jane Pitt produced by Chelsea murders. Will Rose lip and Abbey Ruzicka. The Calla Crossley Show is a production of WGBH Boston Public Radio.