New version of Toledo Talk

Paying parents to educate their kids - AM 1370 WSPD morning show host Bob Frantz mentioned this story. He interviewed the creator of the idea Dr. Charles Whitten. Dr. Whitten said nothing else has worked, so it's time to pay parents to help educate their kids. I only heard a couple of responses by callers, but one lamented, "We're paying parents to parent." The idea seems so wrong, but maybe Dr. Whitten is right. For Toledo Public Schools, I'd support a pilot test of one or two schools over a 2-4 year period. Of course, a levy would have to be passed to support even an experiment, so there's that issue to deal with too. I like the idea of every urban school becoming a charter school, but Dr. Whitten's idea is probably easier to implement. "Christian was part of an experimental program designed to involve parents in helping their kids and, as a result, fight abysmal reading scores of black children in Detroit Public Schools. The lure: Parents are paid to come to monthly classes and work with their child."

"The man behind it: Dr. Charles Whitten, a retired distinguished professor and associate dean in Wayne State University's School of Medicine, well-known nationally for his efforts as a sickle-cell disease specialist and for recruiting minorities into medicine. Whitten acknowledges that some may question paying parents to teach their children, but he is adamant that it works."

"Some may question." You think?

But, Dr. Whitten said:

"We've tried everything else. We found a way to get parents to prepare their children by paying them."

"Veronica Morrow, Christian's mother, said she would have signed up for the program regardless of the cash incentive, which was $60 a month for working with the child 15 minutes a day, six days a week."

That works out to be around $10 an hour. Who's going to work, I mean, parent for that low rate?

"Whitten said he firmly believes that if parents knew how to teach their children -- and were committed to it -- their kids wouldn't enter kindergarten so far behind. So, with the help of a Wayne State education professor, Whitten created the curriculum."

"Many unprepared children are coming from homes where there are few books, few adults reading and few adults reading to their children."

Read the whole news story, which describes the program. It's an interesting idea, and it appears solid, on the surface. It's also sad that it has come to this, but something has to change. The status quo is failing.

I'd be for TPS looking into this and running a pilot test. But the kids would have to demonstrate improvement. If the kids don't pass or show improvement on at least half of the testing sections, then the parents don't get the money, or the parents have to give the money back. There has to be accountability.
posted by jr to education at 2:16 P.M. EST     (6 Comments)

Comments ...

Oh, how long I could rant about what a terrible idea this sponsorship idea is.

Firstly and overwhemlingly, inducing parental involvement with money is the very last thing anyone sensible should do. Money corrupts parenting; for example, welfare programs that paid more per child only induced people to have more children.

Secondly, education has been destroyed from government mandates. The sponsorship idea just means more shifting of education control onto the state, leading to more of the same destruction.

Thirdly -- and sorry, jr -- the TPS doing anything will involve another levy, and I vote those down summarily. The TPS mis-spends money like a horny, drunk factory worker; they don't even deserve the money they're receiving now.

Society must change to return to the ideas of family units of whatever type. This new paradigm of latchkey kids and both parents working, ISN'T WORKING. What's really needed is not more income, but fewer expenses. With those savings, people can stop working so much and attend to personal needs. (Of course, that would mean America would mint fewer millionaires every year, which Forbes magazine will decry as something close to Communism, but they are hypercapitalist arseholes and can be summarily ignored.)
posted by Guest at 11:02 P.M. EST on Thu Jul 15, 2004     #

I agree with "Guest" on his first point. That particular welfare program mutated parenting into a revenue stream. All it ended up doing was creating more children for people who weren't equipped to raise even a single dependent. The difference with this program though is the payoff. Ten dollars per hour isn't exactly a windfall, and they'd actually have to show up to get the money. Why pay cash though? Why not offer gift certificates or vouchers for things the kids would need anyway? (Winter coats, school supplies, sneakers, etc...)

"Guest's" second comment is just an unsupported accusation (no facts offered) so I won't even address it.

I will say I'm not surprised to hear that you act on things without consideration. After all, you defended your voting stance by again making unsupported (but very colorful) accusations and sweeping judgements. In fact, I agree with you about money not being well spent *but* you are taking your frustrations out on the wrong people. Let's take a second and look at things. Who makes most important decisions about the way the system is run? The school board. Who gets paid the same amount of money and keeps their jobs no matter how many levies get voted down? The school board. Who can be voted out of the Toledo Public School system by you? Do you see a pattern here? Summarily voting levies down only hurts the kids and people who actually teach those kids.

I also agree that there needs to be a change to families but the problem doesn't lie in income or latchkey kids. I believe the problem is that there are a lot of irresponsible and uneducated parents who only care that their kids keep quiet and don't bother them. Either they don't know or care that it's their responsibility to foster the learning process after the kids leave schools. Some even believe it's the responsibility of the school to provide glasses, coats, lunches and even teaching morals!
Your argument that families with more income (or more millionaires) leads to failing kids is refuted by empirical data. The worst pupil performance is usually in low-income central city areas, not in the suburbs which are rich in dual income families. Studies also suggest that "the factors that matter most for student achievement on standardized tests are teacher instructional actions; teacher expectations for students; students' total weekly out-of-school time in high-yield activities; activity quality; parental standards, beliefs, and expectations; and teacher-parent communication actions." (We can argue the merits of standardized tests another time.)

(By the way... REGISTER!)

-Dan
posted by photodan at 01:05 P.M. EST on Fri Jul 16, 2004     #

Nice try at discrediting point #2, but there's:

"The Deliberate Dumbing Down of America" by Charlotte Iserbyt

... among others. Jesus Christ, Photodan, in this day and age of Google, saying "I don't know" is just a clear exposure of intellectual laziness.

Registration's for weenies. Facts stand alone. Deal with the message, not the messenger ... or withdraw.

Although not expansive enough, you are right as rain about voter apathy and ineptitude. It takes a true idiot to continue voting these twits in, election after election, while test scores (hey, they indicate something) are in the single digits for inner-city grade schools. Voters should have cleaned house on the TPS administration a loooong time ago. I try to, but find myself consistently outvoted.

Still, like any other board, once a person is emplaced, they have their duty to perform. I consider them derelict of said duties. If the voter won't oust them, I don't feel constrained against criticizing the officials.

We face a polyvariate problem with education's decay. Many are responsible: Students, teachers, parents, administrators, and finally people-at-large (i.e. society). We can easily pick significant failings in each sector. What shall we do?

Like with any big, huge problem, we have to start somewhere. So fix something. Capitalize on the accumulative effect of many small efforts. Vote out an official, trade select shouts with a teacher, tutor a student, and generally rock the system with fearless behavior. It may be emotional, but is fired from intellectual anger. Whoever said emotions were invalid causative agents? Probably some urban yuppie with too much at stake in his heavily technocratic system.
posted by Guest at 11:52 A.M. EST on Sat Jul 17, 2004     #

Actually, I didn't try to discredit #2 because you made no arguments to discredit. It's not my responsibility to research your points for you. You also don't need to blaspheme to stress your frustration.

-Dan
posted by photodan at 02:47 A.M. EST on Sun Jul 18, 2004     #

Photodan, you are a true piece of Toledo work. Never leave Toledo; the real world will eat you alive.

You stated my "second comment is just an unsupported accusation (no facts offered)". I offered at least one source (Iserbyt). Then you say you "didn't try to discredit #2 because you [Guest] made no arguments to discredit".

Fact#1: Calling a statement "unsupported" is a clear attempt to discredit it.

Fact#2: You can Google like anyone else.

Then you wander into this truly mystifying statement: "It's not my responsibility to research your points for you."

No, but it's your responsibility to acknowledge a source when I hand you one, after you imply one does not exist due to an "unsupported accusation".

Photodan, do you have any idea how foolish you look to the readership right now? At least have the grace to blush. (Or perhaps the joke's on me; the readership here seems to be Jr, you, the "Chaz-ster", and of course myself.)

Toledo definitely needs more bookstores. You could stand to read some more, if this is the standard of your rationality. You DO know where the West Toledo library is, right? When last I heard, they keep books in there. Despite the infection of children's books (read: dumbed-down happytalk crap), they do have a fine selection of adult materials. Like I implied in another posting, I obtained the novel "The Monkey Wrench Gang" and am currently reading it. If that's not quite your thing, then try "Ecotopia" (located in Sanger, I believe).

So, here's your Personal Development Plan {tm}:

1) Shut off your TV forever. Throw it out the window.
2) Get a library card if you don't already have one.
3) Read.
4) Think.
and finally:
5) Interact with real people, not addled Liberals and evil Conservatives. Strike up conversations on topics you don't know much about. Human intelligence is strongly built by conversation.

P.S. Blaspheme?!?! Is this some kind of joke? Please provide proof of the existence of this "god" and then I'll cede you your point. Until then, "Jesus Christ" is just a phrase, and welcome to my freedom of speech, Ace. I mean ... Jesus Effin' Christ!!
posted by Guest at 12:15 A.M. EST on Wed Jul 21, 2004     #

Morphing into a book discussion. That's fine.

I read a lot of fiction, and most of it bores me to pain. I drop a lot of books after a few pages. Chuck Palahniuk is the best, in my opinion. Last week, I read the "Stepford Wives" by Ira Levin, which is a great read and much better than the movie. Currently, I'm reading "The Mezzanine" by Nicholson Baker, which is, um, definitely interesting. A fun kind of boredom, if that makes sense.

I prefer short stories, with the Nick Adams stories by Hemingway being my favorite. But I also read a lot of children's and young adult novels, because they're more entertaining and faster moving than most fiction. And they're not victimized by unnecessary word-bloat. "Freak the Mighty" and "Speak" are a couple of my favorites in the youngster category.
posted by jr at 08:43 A.M. EST on Wed Jul 21, 2004     #

<< Older Tom Clancy writes for the Blade    |    Hersh says US has tapes of Iraqi boys be... Newer >>

This is an old topic and is no longer allowing comments.