9486 in the collection  

Worse Than You Think

NOTE: The Pacific Research Institute The Institute stands for policies that "emphasize a free economy, private initiative, and limited government." The Pacific Research Institute has associated with other think-tanks like the American Enterprise Institute and the Cato Institute.

Here are their corporate funders:
* Altria
* ChevronTexaco
* Cypress Semiconductor
* Exxon Mobil Corporation
* Freedom Communications
* Microsoft
* Pfizer
* PhRMA
* SBC (now AT&T)
* Verizon
* White House Writers Group

Here are their foundation funders:
* Anschutz Foundation
* Bernard Lee Schwartz Foundation
* Capecchio Foundation
* Center for American Unity
* Charles Koch Foundation
* Chase Foundation of Virginia
* D & DF Foundation
* D & D Foundation
* David and Annette Jorgensen Foundation
* Dean Witter Foundation
* Earhart Foundation
* Farrell Family Foundation
* Girard foundation
* Hugh & Hazel Darling Foundation
* Lilly Endowment
* Lynder and Harry Bradley Foundation
* Milbank Foundation for Rehabilitation
* Philip M. McKenna Foundation
* Ruth & Lovett Peters Foundation
* Sarah Scaife Foundation
* Templeton Foundation
* The Gleason Foundation
* The Hickory Foundation
* The Little River Foundation
* The San Francisco Foundation
* Walton family Foundation
* Weiler Foundation
* William E. Simon Foundation
* William H. Donner Foundation
This information is from
Source Watch.

Of course the notoriious Lance Izumi, a fellow who thinks NCLB is the best idea since bubble wrap, is one of the authors of the "study." Here is how Pacific Research Institute describes their publication:



Not as Good as You Think: Why the Middle Class Needs School Choice

By: Lance T. Izumi, J.D., Vicki E. Murray, Ph.D, Rachel Chaney, Rosemarie Fusano, Ruben Peterson
9.24.2007

Even as middle-class living conditions have improved only modestly, the burden of paying for a home has increased dramatically. Over a generation, the average number of rooms in a home increased by seven percent as average mortgage expenses increased by 69 percent—at a time when other family expenses were falling. The impact of rising mortgage costs has been huge. The proportion of families who are “house-poor”—that is, who spend more than 35 percent of their incomes on housing—has quadrupled in a single generation.

The major reason middle-class families are willing to shell out so much of their incomes on housing is that “when a family buys a house, it buys much more than shelter from the rain”; more to the point, it “buys a public-school system.” “Talk with an average middle-class parent in any major metropolitan area,” they say, “and she’ll describe the time, money, and effort she devoted to finding a slot in a decent school.” They note that, “For most middle-class parents, ensuring that their children get a decent education means buying a home in a small subset of well-reputed school districts.”

Right now, many middle-class parents complacently believe that things are great in their neighborhood public schools. Is that belief largely true or an illusion? If the latter, then bold action on the part of middle-class parents is overdue.




Editorial

Proponents of educational choice tend to focus on the underprivileged, which is understandable given that low-income kids are overrepresented in failing inner-city public schools. But an emphasis on the plight of the poor can leave the impression that middle-class public school students are doing fine. And that would be a false impression, according to a new book-length study by the Pacific Research Institute, "Not as Good as You Think: Why the Middle-Class Needs School Choice."

Conventional wisdom holds that upscale communities tend to have "good" schools, and parents often buy homes in expensive neighborhoods so their kids have a shot at a decent public education. But the PRI study, which focused on California, found that in nearly 300 schools in middle-class and affluent neighborhoods, "less than half of the students in at least one grade level performed at proficiency in state math and English tests."

Many of these schools were located in the Golden State's toniest zip codes, places like Orange County, Silicon Valley and the beach communities of Los Angeles. In areas such as Newport Beach, Capistrano and Huntington Beach, where million-dollar houses are commonplace, researchers found more than a dozen schools where 50% to 80% of students weren't proficient in math at their grade level. In one Silicon Valley community where the median home goes for $1.6 million, less than half of 10th and 11th graders scored at or above proficiency on the state English exam.

Schools serving middle-income kids are also doing a poor job of preparing them for higher education. Some 60% of freshmen in the California State University system need remedial courses. And it's not because they grew up in Watts. At Dos Pueblos High School in ritzy Santa Barbara, only 28% of high school juniors tested college-ready for English in 2006, slightly better than the 23% of students who did so at San Marin High School in Marin County, where the median home price recently hit $1 million.

"Many middle-class parents don't think they have a stake in the school-choice debate," says Lance Izumi, the lead author of the study, in an interview. "They assume their schools are doing better than they are." In reality, these families would benefit from vouchers, tuition tax credits, charter schools and other educational options as surely as the inner-city single mom.

And the competitive pressure would help make the surrounding public schools better. "When you show people in these communities how their schools aren't doing so well, how they're not getting the bang for their buck," says Mr. Izumi, "they can begin to see how the debate over school choice affects them, too."

— Editorial
Wall Street Journal
2007-10-24


---

INDEX OF OUTRAGES

Pages: 380   
[1] 2 3 4 5 6  Next >>    Last >>