Nazareth Superintendent: 'Education is Under Attack'
Superintendent Victor Lesky warns that voucher programs, charter schools could ruin public education.
Photos
Nazareth Area Schools Superintendent Victor Lesky made an impassioned plea recently that public education must be protected at all costs.
The retiring school official targeted charter schools, funding issues and voucher programs as threats to public education.
"Education is under attack in Pennsylvania," Lesky said. "I love competition and would relish the chance to compete with cyber and charter schools. But it has to be on the same playing field."
Lesky argued that those schools don't have to adhere to such mandates placed on public schools, like special education, for example.
"If we could start a school for science and technology only, I'm sure it would be among the best," he said.
Lesky said that if charter and cyber schools take away the district's best students, then "I'm afraid our schools will be schools to only educate the disabled and the poor."
The superintendent criticized state politicians who are pushing charter schools and voucher programs as failing to see the big picture in what public education is all about.
"Schools are a melting pot where everyone comes together to learn about each other," he said. "They are going to destroy public education in the state."
He said that there is a place in the education world for charter and cyber schools, but that they shouldn't be a priority or considered the saving grace to get pupils to a higher education plane.
"Kids are the ones who are going to get hurt," Lesky said. "I don't believe that's the right way to go."
Wayne Schissler
6:23 am on Wednesday, November 2, 2011
I've heard these arguments before and they falls flat in so many ways...
Just a few points.
Right now those who do school elsewhere are struggling to keep their children in these other schools. The bad economy has hit everyone (it has been my observation that plenty of middle class and poor already school elsewhere) - is Nazareth ready to build another school if these children can no longer afford to go to their schools?
One of the rationalizations for keeping our teachers salaries "competitive" with the wealthier districts has been so as to attract a better caliber of teacher. Have you ever compared public vs parochial teacher salaries? And yet the schools with "under paid" teachers are attracting the better students (according to Lesky) somehow? The arguments given are not even consistent within themselves, let alone with the facts...
There's many more points that could be made.
Rosemary B
10:09 am on Friday, November 4, 2011
School Choice is the right way to go. One size does not fit all children. Just because you live in a certain zip code does not mean their school system is best for your child. Some kids thrive in a smaller learning environment. They should be able to find that type of school and thrive there. What about a child who is bullied? Why should they have to continue to go to a school that they do not feel safe in? They should be able to get a fresh start elsewhere. That could actually save lives. Where is the incentive for a school to change, improve or solve problems if they know the kids can't go anywhere else? If the kids and the tax dollars could walk out the door the schools would work harder to meet the needs of each child. School Choice would improve all the schools. I think their should be school choice between the public schools as well.