
My youngest daughter is on a waitlist to a top early childhood education program until next October. My husband and I are willing to wait because we're confident she'll thrive there. Still, we find ourselves troubled. The reason: She's already waiting in line, but hasn't even been born yet.
Optimistic about her future, I must concede I'm also a little scared about the world she'll live in. Could people really be putting their children on school waiting lists three months before they are even conceived? If only we hadn't waited until the second trimester.
.
Not that we didn't have fair warning. More than a year ago, as we began to look at preschool for our oldest daughter, now a toddler, we ran into the stiffest of competition. After one top school's waiting list hit 700 children, administrators stopped taking names.
Fortunately, we weren't out of luck completely. After several months on a waiting list at the same school we hope our youngest daughter will attend, we gained admission.
But now, as we've mastered getting in to a top preschool in a large city, we're back to the drawing board. We must plan for kindergarten.
As we've recently learned, the rules are a little more sophisticated and the stakes are a lot higher. One in four Denver families opt out of public schools and we're beginning to learn why.
While liberal lawmakers love to paint such families as elitists, the truth is clearly not that simple. As Ed Feulner, president of the Heritage Foundation, eloquently put it recently, many lawmakers seem to favor "school choice for me, not for thee."
A 2007 Heritage survey found that 37 percent of U.S. Congressman and 45 percent of senators send their children to private schools—rates three to four times greater than that of ordinary American families.
Colorado's Democratic legislators and teachers' unions actively fight school choice efforts. Earlier this year, House Education Chair Mike Merrifield got into hot water and was forced to resign his chairmanship after saying there was a "special place in hell" for charter school parents and those seeking other educational options, including publicly-funded scholarships for low-income students seeking escape from failing public schools.
Those like Merrifield continue to fight school choice efforts despite overwhelming evidence that it helps everyone—including children from our most disadvantaged neighborhoods. Public charter schools in Denver's mostly Hispanic west Denver neighborhoods are thriving. Just a few years ago, these neighborhoods were bleeding students to better districts; today, they have parents begging for admission.
Jessica Peck Corry is a public policy analyst with the Independence Institute.
Like many Denver families, my husband and I face a difficult decision. Do we send our daughters to the mediocre public school located just blocks from our house, or instead, do we continue to pay property taxes to fund this school, while also somehow finding a way to finance tuition at one of Denver's elite private schools?
The truth is that my husband and I would love to send our daughters to our neighborhood public school, but a recent look at test scores proved devastating to this idea. Nearly half the school's children function below grade level when it comes to math, reading, and science.
We've also considered moving a few blocks east so we can live in the "good" district, where student performance indicators are nearly twice as high.
But can we afford this? For the same house we're living in now, we'd likely pay 30 to 50 percent more on our mortgage every month. At play dates these days, parents lament "you either pay it in your mortgage or you pay it in tuition." But even if we scale back and are lucky enough to find a less expensive house in the better district, we'd still run the risk of being waitlisted.
One of my former neighbors made the move, but was shocked when she learned her children will have to wait at least a year before they can be admitted.
After another neighbor cautioned us that many private schools begin interviewing for kindergarten admission more than a year in advance, we realized that we have only a matter of months before we'll have to begin preparing for the process of school tours, open houses, and lengthy applications. The hunt is on. But the process makes applying for college look like a walk in the park.
One school for "gifted" children asks the following questions: What was your child's Apgar score (based on a test that evaluates a newborn's health, breathing, and heart rate) one minute after birth? Was there exposure to radiation during pregnancy? Was there any alcohol consumed post-conception?
Literally, the process of judging children at this school begins before they are even born. And the poor mothers—how does the woman who enjoyed a couple glasses of wine (with her doctor's okay) during pregnancy answer the question about alcohol? What if she had an x-ray after a fall during the second trimester? Do "yes" answers mean her child won't get in? Is there any hope?
So we looked at other schools, including a top Catholic school located within walking distance of our home. The application clearly (and understandably) gives strong preference to Catholic families. My husband grew up Presbyterian and I grew up in the Church of Christ. Does this mean our girls will miss out?
Now well into the process of investigating schools, we have settled on three or four top choices. The average tuition for full-day kindergarten starts at about $15,000—more than three years of my college tuition and almost as much as what I paid for my master's degree from a private university five years ago. Forget about the college fund, why didn't anyone tell us to invest in a kindergarten fund?
I'm quickly learning that our situation is not unique. Many of Denver's middle class families are finding themselves similarly positioned.
Two years ago, my husband and I left the quiet tranquility of the suburbs to take the plunge on life in one of downtown's original neighborhoods.
We fell in love with our 110-year-old house, the tree-lined streets, and ultimately, the urban chaotic community that we both secretly missed after tenures on the East Coast. From the moment we arrived, we knew we were supposed to be here. We loved the idea of our children growing up in a neighborhood like this. It would foster their curiosities and build their sense of independence. But what is all of this worth if they can't get a quality formal education?
My husband and I are products of quality public schools. He got a great education while growing up in a Midwest college town; my experience, however, was only salvaged due to the tenacity of my parents. After they realized that the neighborhood school my brother, sisters, and I were attending was failing us, they looked for options. Private school tuition was out of the question.
After years languishing on a waitlist for a top alternative public school, we got in. We thrived. The Jefferson County school led the state in test scores, graduation rates, and all other performance indicators. Many of my classmates' parents bragged about putting them on the waitlist on the way home from the hospital.
My husband and I dream of having three or four children, but could we ever possibly afford $60,000 a year in private school tuition? Likely not. Should we pack it up and move to a better—and less expensive—school district in the suburbs? We're reluctant to leave our neighborhood, knowing our children would miss out on the positive life experiences that will define their lives here.
Good schools aren't just talking points for America's families. Politicians should stop reading from the script of teachers' unions and start listening to parents. We'll do whatever it takes to save our kids from failing schools. Who can blame us?
Editor’s note: Jessica Peck Corry's weekly blogs are part of a new feature on The Denver Post's PoliticsWest.com site called "Diary of a Mad Voter." The group blog, published in partnership with NewWest.Net/Politics, is intended to give a glimpse into the hearts and minds of several independent-minded voters and thinkers in the Rocky Mountain West in the '08 election cycle. Check back regularly at www.politicswest.com for "Diary of a Mad Voter."
Are you kidding me????
This comment goes directly to...who is writing about Tinky Winky and home values....
First off cheap house does not correlate with good school. Do you know where Ms Corry lives? Have you seen her home? If not I am pretty positive you should not be commenting on house values especially hers in a public forum. I, for example live in a gated golf course community in a home I would consider to be pretty nice and the view are fabulous, and I drive 45 minutes to send my kids to a good school because I didn't want to gamble with their education. I would not classify my family as being poor by any stretch of the imagination or wealthy either, but we cannot afford to pay 30k a year to send our kids to the private school. If we could I would definately. Since we made the decision not to pay for private, I drive a long distance so they have a good education in a public school. Fortunately in my state we do have open enrollment so I do have a choice and I am glad for it because we would have to move into a neighborhood we could not afford to get them into a school that we feel is good.
Second off you sound like a bitter person with your attack on the Independence Institute. I don't recall her mentioning that once in the article. In fact the Independence Institute nor Tinky Winky, cooking, how wealthy her husband is, her house value or being gay have anything to do with school choice. I agree with the other reader who said you are personally attacking Ms Corry. Put down the bottle, lose the bitterness and be nice it will take you to great places in this world!
How Not to Choose a School (that would be Corry's way)
I've never responded to a Post opinion piece before, but Jessica Corry's, A Tough Choice on Schools, really was too much not too call her on it. (She mentions her husband's great public school education in a college town, which is how I stumbled upon it.) In it she whines about living in an urban neighborhood with a "mediocre public school located just blocks from our house."
Well, as Corry has written in the past, chiding others, "The problem with the American Dream in today’s society is that too many believe it should arrive instantly on a silver platter. And when it doesn't, the Dream is seen as something that happens to other people - those with connections." Or in this case those with more disposable income than the Corrys.
Maybe Corry needs better connections, or a richer husband ... or to consider home schooling - which would probably be a blessing to her kid's future underpaid private school teachers. Or, for goodness sake, moving back to the suburbs where she won't have to fret about her kid's schooling (she's a busy woman after all) and her mindset will fit right in.
In the article, Corry bemoans the common reaction to families such as hers choosing private schools for their kids, "While liberal lawmakers love to paint such families as elitists, the truth is clearly not that simple."
Yeah, Jessica, it kinda is. If it quacks like a duck ...
For another working journalist mom's positive take on public education in a mixed-income urban neighborhood, see Brigid Schulte's insightful 2/4/07 Washington Post article, How Not to Choose a School.
If you were a child approaching school age which mom would you want? That little Corryette has a tough road ahead of her, bless her heart.
You said it!!
Ms. Corry, thank you for stating – clearly and concisely – something that I believe is true… our public schools are failing our children. This translates not only to a gross waste of taxpayer dollars, but also to a major shortfall in the idea that an effort at giving every child in America a free, publicly-funded education is the best way to approach the (obvious) need for educating the young in our country.
It is becoming more and more clear that our current idea of public schooling is the least effective way to educate children. The fact that children who attend charter and private schools consistently outscore children in the “tests” that “matter” (SAT, ACT, college matriculation rates) speaks as loudly as possible to me… And while she never requested one, I’d like to know that school vouchers are available to help her send her children (the one here and the one who will be) to the best school she can find. Why shouldn’t I want her to have that option? My tax dollars (and hers) are currently funding the public school she is not comfortable sending her children to… why shouldn’t they fund a school she does find acceptable?
As a person whose parents moved from one state (which - then and now - battles a few others for the bottom spot in the nation for school funding, school scores, literacy rates, etc.) to another (Colorado) in order to ensure their children received a good education I buy the idea that one should take the quality of education in the area where one settles down into account… But Ms. Corry’s point is one which is even more important: why should one have to make that consideration?
The questions she asks are: why are public schools not living up to the bar that they set for themselves? And why should she have to move to a “better” neighborhood/town/state (in my parents’ case) in order to ensure that her daughters receive a better education? The answers to both of these questions: she shouldn’t have to, but that is the reality of the world that we live in. She is – regretfully – facing that.
I’m not sure what Mr. Happy is getting at with his comments… they appear to be little more than an uninformed personal attack. Anyone who has read more than one of her articles would never accuse her of sending her children to a school which teaches “the next generation that Tinky-Winky is a front for gay liberation” or that “people go to hell if they use contraception.” And I, for one, very much appreciate the voice that Ms. Corry has given to this issue.
Right on, Ms. Corry… and write on!!
test scores and schools
There are two unexamined assumptions here: one is that CSAP test scores are an accurate measurement of the worth of the school; the other is that private schools are necessarily better than public.
It's possible to get a good score in CSAP by teaching to the test. This does not measure what the children are not learning: work habits, creativity, learning how to learn, etcetera. Poor scores may reflect only a commitment to different teaching values, not a failing school. Note too that these tests are designed to cause every school to fail eventually. The No Child Left Behind (NCLB) legislation that created CSAP ensures this, since it requires 100% proficiency (every student proficient) by 2014. There are also lots of other ways to fail, see http://www.voxeu.org/index.php?q=node/510 and http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/137200_q&a29.html for a start. The political dimensions of NCLB and by extension CSAP, render these test results of dubious worth.
Since private schools are not required by NCLB to take these tests, there's no way to measure a public against a private school. Indeed, there is no commonly-available way to measure the performance of private schools at all. This leaves only the hard way: interviewing the principals, teachers and other parents at each school, together with classroom observations. The best guarantee of a good school is to be involved with the school, which is difficult in an age that needs two salaries per family to make ends meet.
Eating your own cooking
Ha! Another free marketeer done in by her own devotion to the allegedly free market. Everyone knows the rich have always had schools with higher test scores. (This has less to do with the school itself and more to do with wealthier parents having more time to spend on their children). Corry and her husband decided to spend less on their house, but now belly-ache that the local school isn't up to her snuff. What's the surprise here -- that the house was cheaper, or that a couple professing their dedication to education declined to research local schools before making their major housing investment?
And now she wants my public tax dollars to fund, via vouchers, schools that teach the next generation that Tinky-Winky is a front for gay liberation, that people go to hell if they use contraception, that three puffs of white smoke from a chimney in Rome make a man -- and only a man -- infallible?
Life in many ways is a series of tradeoffs. But when alleged free-marketing think tanks (Independence Institute) try to impose their Ayn Rand philosophies -- privatize all gains, socialize all losses -- to schools, then somebody wins, and somebody loses. Sounds like the chickens have come home to roost in the Corry house.
Lighten up Mr. H
I love the little tyrannies. Everyone in America loves choice, be it to have an abortion or extra value meals. But there are some of you with alliterative names that sound like they belong to fuzzy men luring kids into white panel vans with candy, who think choice for them means no choice for me.
My partner and I (seventeen years in a faithful gay partnership that is somehow not a marriage!) don't have kids, but we get to pay taxes for the teachers union to run our local schools. If vouchers are so doomed to fail, I say why not try them? Let them fail and be done forever with this debate (our government wastes far more on social experiments). The reason? The teacher unions and their thugs know they will work and they know it will expose mediocre schools, administrators and educators for what they are and the ill they do.
I have no choice. I have to pay taxes for YOUR schools. I think the Corry's and parents like them, who are committed to giving their child the very best, should have a say. They should not be held hostage by geography or the unions. Maybe once they have a say we will see improvement.
I'd offer that as a proud, educated, African-American, I see many young kids in my community held hostage by poor and dysfunctional schools. While some see racism, I see no way out for them until they have vouchers and their parents (or parent) has the chance to transfer that kid to a better school. Why my fellow African-Americans do not feel the same I will never know.
What's up, Mr. Happy Pants?
Sheesh, somebody is a union thug in sheep's clothing, Mr. Happy! I read this article and then saw your comment and had to re-read the article because I thought that we clearly had not read the same article.
You completely missed the point of Ms. Corry's article and clearly exposed yourself as a whining liberal who hates God. She didn't mention vouchers for private religious schools in her article; she mentioned PUBLIC charter schools (in case you haven't been educated about charter schools yet, they're not religious in their teaching!) and in a separate paragraph mentioned a PRIVATE Catholic school, without nary a suggestion to fund a religious school with public funds. Get your facts straight before you go off on your "shame the conservatives/religious/rich"!
What Ms. Corry is stating, in my understanding, is that it's a pretty sad statement about the quality of public mainstream education that there are long waitlists for public charter schools. No longer is it the norm for children to attend the local school throughout their education because regardless of where "local" is for them, parents are needing to resort to looking elsewhere for a quality education for their children.
Mr. Happy, your misguided statement that "Everyone knows the rich have always had schools with higher test scores. (This has less to do with the school itself and more to do with wealthier parents having more time to spend on their children)." is such a generalized statement and not necessarily true. Have you checked out the CSAP scores lately? The top schools are not all in the highest wage earning zip codes. Oh, and your offensive comment about the rich having more time to spend with their children is offensive to those who are not rich, but make it a priority to read with their kids every night. Money in the wallet doesn't quantify more time learning with the parent. I guess your kids wouldn't know much about time one-on-one with their parent reading because you're too busy making erroneous and over-stated comments about the state of our education system.
In case someone hasn't told you lately, Happy Pants, it doesn't take a village to raise a child well. Rather it takes a parent to be proactive and find the best educational opportunities available for their children. That either means the schools need to stop being badgered by the teachers' unions and get their act together to teach children properly or the option to seek out higher quality charter schools needs to be made available to ALL families, regardless of your stereotypes about their monetary class.