Subscriber Login

Forgot Your Username?
Forgot Your Password?
Offers clarifications on voucher schools PDF Print E-mail


Letter to the Editor:

After reading Mr. Gullan’s letter (May 1 issue) about voucher schools, I felt a little clarification was needed. Mr. Gullan stated, “Private voucher schools are usually better.”

This is the headline from an article in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel of April 23, 2013: “Wisconsin voucher students lag in latest state test.”

The article states, “About 13% of students in private voucher schools scored proficient or better in math and about 11% scored proficient or advanced in reading . . . Milwaukee Public Schools’ overall proficiency rates of about 19% of students proficient in math and about 14% clearing the proficiency bar in reading.”

I am wondering why the state

legislators would want to expand funding for an unproven program. Mr. Gullan states, “Second, it is the parent who decides where to send their child to school.” This is correct. Wisconsin has open enrollment so that parents can send their children to public schools in different districts and parents have always had the option to send their children to private schools.


The rural districts, such as the districts surrounding Eagle River, would not benefit from voucher expansion. Our tax dollars would go to urban areas to fund their private schools.

Another article from the Journal Sentinel stated, “Vouchers began in Milwaukee, were expanded to Racine last year, and under Walker’s proposal would be allowed in nine additional districts. Those are: Beloit, Fond du Lac, Green Bay, Kenosha, Madison, Sheboygan, Superior, Waukesha, and West Allis-West Milwaukee.

“School leaders in all nine districts have spoken out against the plan, saying it would devastate their budgets and shift students into private schools that aren’t held to the same accountability measures as public schools.”

My last clarification or question relates to this statement: “When I see letters from our educators expressing concern over our under-achieving education system and offering ways to fix it, I will decrease my skepticism.”

I don’t think that Ms. Andrist is a teacher.


Barb Neddo

Eagle River


Tuesday, May 14, 2013 2:05 PM
Last Updated on Tuesday, May 14, 2013 4:13 PM


-18 #51 Frank Gabl 2013-06-18 12:16

Your answer to your question is rather simple about testing:

Under Clinton's Goals 2000 - your side.

Under Bush's No Child Left Behind - mine.

Under Obama's Common Core - yours.

I've never stated otherwise and in fact referenced Bush's NCLB long ago.

Your argument is silly.
+14 #50 2013-06-18 10:22
Sorry Frank, that's exactly what they are and what you ALWAYS do. You brush off what your side does and has done, you deflect and you attempt to rewrite history which your party is famous for. Once again, Which side left or right (not talking politicians, just people) have long argued that standardized testing doesn't work? It's a rather simple question Frank.
-18 #49 Frank Gabl 2013-06-12 23:30

"Alinsky" is not a "standard catch phrase" as you well know since you and your president are both acolytes of the leftist.

Yet I must say, Rules for Radicals (that's you) #5: “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon,” you should really brush up on cause it's not working for you any longer.
+14 #48 2013-06-11 23:48
Note to Frank....when all else fails revert to standard catch phrases of Alinsky vs. anything of substance or value.
-19 #47 Frank Gabl 2013-06-07 17:55
Note to John,

When all else fails, revert to the John of last year with nonsense, ala, Alinsky.
0 #46 2013-06-06 18:14
f common core is anti-American then I guess that would make your party anti-American since they were the first to start and push this agenda. You guys got what you wanted and now you don't want what YOU created. It's like someone that eats and eats, gets fat and then complains they are fat because of someone else. Your side wanted it, fought for it for decades and now doesn't want it. Embrace the weight Frank.
-20 #45 Frank Gabl 2013-06-05 19:46

Testing and assessments for Common Core, which are being developed and written by SBAC (Communist Bill Ayers endorsed for Education Secretary, Linda Darling-Hammond) and PARCC (Socialist Sir Michael Barber's crony corporation, Pearson) are putting it all together for Obama.

So ask them why they're now producing what you're suggesting that they are against.

The bone of contention about Common Core from the Right's perspective has always been the dictitorial and illegal takeover of education as a whole and the indoctrination factor that is imminent when control is taken out of the hands of local communities.

A "common core" of education is advantageous. A "Common Core" education is anti-American.
+18 #44 2013-06-05 14:29
Simple question Frank. Which ideology has been for testing standards and which side has argued that they don't work? A simple answer will suffice.
-22 #43 Frank Gabl 2013-06-05 01:47

I hate to burst your "ends justify the means" bubble by exposing your sneaky tactics for what they are, but this has never been about a generic lower case "common core" but rather, the specific proper noun of Obama's "Common Core" education initiative.

If you can't play an honest game you will only end up looking petty, foolish and shamelessly underhanded.
+19 #42 2013-06-04 17:25
Frank, the Left NEVER created common core, the Right did! From the NGA that Tommy Thompson chaired the year they started working on it to way back when Reagan's Education Secretary started the push for what is now common core. Right from the article stating what Regan's Education Secretary's panel suggested...."Among the remedies prescribed by "A Nation at Risk" was the establishment of a common core curriculum." Your side OWNS IT. Live with it.

Add comment

Comments exceeding 1,000 characters will not be accepted. Please refrain from using texting language and spell out all words. All comments are reviewed and must be approved before they are posted.

Security code