MDL: Madison Music and Arts in Peril

The Madison Daily Leader is running a four-part series on "Changes Taking Place in Madison's Arts Programs." I've read Tuesday's and Wednesday's installments and eagerly await the remaining reports. (Sorry, web friends -- no links! MDL's only offering the text to paying customers, in print.) Special correspondent and well-known local arts advocate Gale Pifer swings the big stick, as he has before on the pages of the local press, seeking out quotes from numerous Madison HS band alums who express concern and disappointment at the apparent dwindling of support for music and the arts in general in the community.

I'll see how this massive series (two pages both nights so far) plays out in full before offering my commntary. For now, I will note one striking image and a couple comments from last night's installment: Pifer quotes local music teacher Ginny Ziebarth, who makes it clear that, contrary to the misperception that she is retiring after a long and respectable career with the Madison Central School District (she was a regular accompanist back when I sang in the glorious Nancy Edwards's MHS choir), her position has actually been eliminated by the school district and folded into the remaining positions. Last night's article also shows an unsmiling Ziebarth painting over an impressive mural, a giant musical score, in the middle school music room. The reason for the whitewashing? Ziebarth says she wants to give the new music teacher a fresh start. The words say one thing, but the image -- ouch.

No Child Left Behind: Don't Renew It -- Undo It!

USA Today offers point-counterpoint editorials on the No Child Left Behind law. The paper's editorial board argues that the law is flawed but fixable (not exactly a characterization parents like to hear about their kids at parent-teacher conferences). Education writer Alfie Kohn responds that the law is "is an appalling and unredeemable experiment that has done incalculable damage to our schools — particularly those serving poor, minority and limited-English-proficiency students" ["Opposing View: 'Too Destructive to Salvage,'" USA Today, posted online 2007.05.31]. Says Kohn,

Let's be clear: This law has nothing to do with improving learning. At best, it's about raising scores on multiple-choice exams. This law is not about discovering which schools need help; we already know. This law is not about narrowing the achievement gap; its main effect has been to sentence poor children to an endless regimen of test-preparation drills. Thus, even if the scores do rise, it's at the expense of a quality education. Affluent schools are better able to maintain good teaching — and retain good teachers — despite NCLB, so the gap widens.

Kohn cites a Teachers Network survey that finds that an unwhopping 3% of teachers believe NCLB helps them teach more effectively. An even less whopping 1% of teachers believe NCLB effectively assesses the quality of schools.

For once, this teacher finds himself among the majority. I have not seen NLCB improve anything other than testing company profits and income for curriculum and testing specialists. The Montrose School District actually hired a specialist not to teach or conduct professional development but just to collect and analyze the data required by NCLB. Other schools have done the same, spending money just to handle the NCLB paperwork, not to directly produce any educational benefits. Spending more money -- local, state, or federal -- on NCLB won't actually improve education; it may only help fund the extra bureaucracy created by this federal effort to turn education into a numbers game and a campaign slogan.

A few summers ago I called in to the midday Forum program on South Dakota Public Radio to ask Governor Rounds how he felt about NCLB. Specifically, I asked how he, as a Republican, rationalized his support for this intrusion of federal power into the fundamentally local issue of education. He put on his big smile (so shiny it gleams even on radio) and said we all ought to be interested in improving educational opportunities for our kids. That's right -- he avoided my question.

(I can't resist pointing out that Governor Rounds espouses support for the principle of local control of schools when it serves his purposes:

My first objection to Senate Bill 95 is that it creates a new and unnecessary layer of government. Senate Bill 95 irreversibly alters a governance system that currently operates well and the way it was intended, with local control. Adding a new bureaucracy simply drains additional state resources and provides no benefit to the technical institutes. I do not support creation of this unneeded layer of government. [veto message rejecting Legislature's effort to create a state-level board to govern South Dakota's vo-tech schools, 2007.03.20])

As recently as the 1990s (back when I was a Republican), the GOP agreed that education was a local issue and wanted to eliminate the federal Department of Education. ("...the federal government has no constitutional authority to be involved in school curricula or to control jobs in the work place. This is why we will abolish the Department of Education, end federal meddling in our schools...." -- GOP platform, 1996.)

Since then, I've changed parties, but the GOP has changed philosophy, creating more big government with NCLB. I'll argue for more financial support for education from the state if that's where I have to go to get it, but education works better when it is funded and controlled at the local level. The teachers and parents in your school district can tell you how the kids are doing and what the school needs to improve on better than any standardized test or bureaucrat from Washington or Pierre can. NCLB doesn't offer any real assistance to education; it wastes money and man-hours. Let's kill it now and let our schools get back to teaching without Washington looking over their shoulders.

Green Schools: Academic Gains, Long-Term Savings

Various sources run an AP story [Dorie Turner, staff writer, "Schools Turning Eco-Friendly," 2007.05.28] about growing interest in "green schools," schools designed to meet the certification standards of the U.S. Green Building Council. The article mentions green building measures like solar panels, more natural lighting (less energy spent on electric lights), recycled building materials, and living roofs (dirt and plant cover insulate better than steel or shingles). One Colorado school makes ice during off-peak hours, stores it, then uses the ice during peak hours to reduce the work the AC units have to do (that took some thinking!).

These green efforts go beyond the building itself. Green-school measures can include restoring and preserving wetlands and wilderness areas around the schools, planting gardens, and removing invasive species (the Turner article cites a project at Clackamas HS in Oregon to "eradicate an acre of blackberries" -- which makes me think, "Wait! What's wrong with yummy blackberries?" to which the article and biologists would answer quite sensibly that blackberries "are not native to Oregon and choke out other vegetation").

Oh, but this must cost money, right? There is no such thing as a free lunch, especially not a green lunch. However, compared to the premiums the organic elites are willing to pay for their Fair Trade Coffee and all-organic tofu, green building practices are cheaper than one might presume. The Turner article says that green schools cost an average of 2% more to build. Turner then cites the "Washington High Performance School Buildings" study, a January 2005 report to the Washington State Legislature, which offers the following lower-end estimates of potential benefits to green schools:

1. 5% increase in test scores
2. 5% reduction in teacher turnover
3. 15% reduction in absenteeism
4. 25% reduction in energy use
5. 38% reduction in potable water use
6. 150% return on investment
7. 38% reduction in wastewater production
8. 22% reduction in construction waste to the landfill
9. more than 1.5 million pounds reduction in CO2 emissions

I don't a tool to fight global warming (#9) to think this is a great idea. South Dakota's legislators should be able to look at just #1-3 and say, "Hey! Let's do this!" Green schools not only save energy and ultimately money but also improve educational outcomes.

These green results make sense from a common-sense perspective. At Madison High School, an artefact of 1960s cheap SD concrete, I taught in one of several interior classrooms with no windows. How depressing, for staff and students, to be cut off from sunshine and fresh air all day! At Montrose, when we moved to our new building in 2002, I gave up a rickety but character-filled old classroom with a wall of south-facing windows for a drab room with one window facing a brick wall. Again, ugh! Learning happens better in comfortable environments, and a little thing like natural light can make a big difference in student and teacher attitudes, not to mention eergy usage. Put another way, maximizing our use of solar energy can improve our use of soul-ar energy.

Madison and Montrose aren't the only schools that could use a facelift. Coaching and judging at speech tournaments around the state, I see lots of schools that are built fast and cheap, with lots of steel and concrete, and lots of pavement all around. A little more investment in windows, recycled materials, renewable energy, and more environmentally friendly landscaping could help our budgets and our environment while providing kids with even better educational opportunities.

Afraid of Gov't-Financed Health Care? We Already Have It

Memo to Zaniya Project Task Force:

As I talk to my friends about health care reform, I generally advocate universal, single-payer health care, like what Congressman and Democratic Presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich has been advocating for years. I often hear responses along the lines of, "Oh! We don't want to be like Canada!* When the government pays for health care, it messes everything up."

As the Zaniya Project entertains the question of the proper role of government in health care, they should consider that the United States already spends more public dollars per capita on health care than Canada, the UK, and a number of other countries that cover a lot more health care for their citizens:

Country: Public Dollars Per Capita Spent on Health Care (2004)
Austria: $2208.67
Canada: $2209.17
Germany: $2349.91
Netherlands: $1894.54
Sweden: $2398.43
Switzerland: $2380.97
United Kingdom: $2176.83
United States: $2727.59

[Source: OECD in Figures, 2006-2007, OECD Observer, pp. 8-9, 83. Online: http://www.oecdobserver.org/news/get_file.php3/id/25/file/OECDInFigures2006-2007.pdf]

This same report (pp. 10-11) also shows the familiar statistics on the US having lower life expectancy and higher infant mortality than most OECD members. If our health care system is so great, why are we spending more and getting less? The Zaniya Project should look across the border and overseas and see what South Dakota could do to model these foreign models of efficient use of its citizens tax dollars.

*Funny -- when my Canadian friends talk about making changes to their health care system, they say, to a person, with great vigor and contempt, "Oh! We don't want to be like the United States!" [return to text]

SD Zaniya Project Online

The Zaniya Project, South Dakota's health care reform (reform? really? we can hope!) task force, has its own website: zaniya.sd.gov. For those of you interested in seeing the state do something to make health care more affordable (and, given annual per capita health care expenses of $5,560, that should be all of us), keep an eye on that website. The state is posting agendae and minutes of the monthly meetings (next one is June 14, Kings Inn, Pierre) as well as copies of the presentations given at each meeting. You can also find contact information for all 52 task force members (playing with a full deck? again, let's hope so).

The task force's final report is due September 30, and their findings and recommendations will surely make for some long days (and possibly significant investments of public dollars) in the 2008 legislative session. We should all thus keep an eye on the task force's progress and keep the conversation active outside the thickly insulated walls of government.

Note to Wiese: Plagiarism Is Lying, Cheating, and Stealing

I come home from the Cities to find plagiarism in the news. SD Watch broke the story of Dennis Wiese's plagiarism of a column on immigration, and the Argus followed up with confirmation yesterday.

I see plagiarism and hear excuses for it regularly in my classroom. Mr. Wiese's pseudo-apology and rationalization in yesterday's Argus sound literally sophomoric:

"If it's wrong, I'm sorry," Wiese said Wednesday. "It is not illegal - matter of fact, I don't find it to be unethical if you have asked the permission to utilize that." [Ben Shouse, "Wiese Column Not Original Work," Argus Leader, 2007.05.24 -- see how that's done, Mr. Wiese?]

If it's wrong? Oh, let my English students assure you, Mr. Wiese, it is wrong. Every school year, I spend the first day of every English class explaining that plagiarism is lying, cheating, and stealing. The plagiarist lies by claiming, "I created these words; they are mine" when someone else actually created and owns those words. The plagiarist cheats by gaining credit (in my kids' case, a grade; in the case of the Wiese column, public recognition for the content, style, and persuasive force of the essay) without doing the work that other honest writers do. The plagiarist steals by claiming ownership of intellectual property that is not his.

Plagiarism is lying, cheating, and stealing. Plagiarism in this case may not be prosecutable. Wiese's alleged permission to use the material may mean that he committed no crime against the original author(s). However, Wiese has still acted unethically against the public by making a blatantly false claim of authorship. South Dakotans have a right to know when they are reading the opinions of their neighbors and when they are reading the propaganda of some out-of-state organization that hides its agenda behind the voices of local mouthpieces. Sources matter. Readers have a right to know them. Writers have an obligation to cite them.

Wiese has also made my job just one more snudge tougher by setting a bad example for my students, who love to find examples of adults behaving badly and then citing that bad behavior as an excuse for their own unethical actions. If my kids are reading the blogs or the Argus, they'll come back in the fall and say, "That Wiese guy plagiarized, and what punishment did he get?" If Wiese were in my class, he'd get a zero for the paper. If Wiese were a student at SDSU, he'd get disciplinary probation, suspension, or expulsion [SDSU Student Conduct Code of the University Community 01:10:25:02]. If Wiese were a nationally recognized author, he'd lose his book contract. If Wiese were a news producer, he'd be fired.

Wiese and my students both need to understand that plagiarism is a violation of ethics, if not law. Instead of his self-justification, Wiese should come clean, offer a sincere apology, and accept whatever consequences may ensue.

Private Money Supports Athletics, Arts in Mitchell

Yesterday's Mitchell Daily Republic reports that the Earl Nordby family has donated $240,000 toward the construction of a 10-field soccer complex. That's over an eighth of the money needed to build what promoters hope to make the best soccer complex in the state. This donation comes after a 2005 donation from the Nordbys of $100,000 to help the Mitchell Area Community Theatre build its new facility. In return, the Nordbys, Pepsi bottling magnates, get the Pepsi name on both facilities.

I'm not terribly fond of corporate naming rights, but I've said elsewhere that selling such rights might be one of the quickest ways to draw a big tub of money toward projects like the new events center that was voted down in Madison in April. The majority of voters may have said they don't have the money for a project like that, but apparently there are private donors who have more than enough money to help float such a project and are just itching for the chance to dish that money out. All they ask in return is a word or two on a sign. Given a choice between giving some rich companies a little free advertising in a public venue and saddling taxpayers with a long-term debt burden, I'll take the former.

But this discussion may be all academic: the gym supporters haven't made any public statements since their drubbing at the polls. No one in a position to make it happen has breathed a word about any Plan B, except to maintain there isn't one. Come on, fellas -- does Bulldog Pride really give up that easily? The Nordbys are just one example of the money that's out there, if you know where to look.

Discover the Unexpected -- Lake County Bloggers!

Hear all sorts of voices from Lake Herman, Madison, and the whole county! Below are just a few blogs from my neighbors.

• Madison Public Library
  
• Finance Is Personal.com -- financial advice from the intelligent and prolific Matthew Paulson
  
• "Hardcore Ambiguity" -- DSU's Dr. Justin Blessinger on tech and teaching
• "General Beadle" -- from DSU faculty based in historic Beadle Hall
• DSU President Dr. Douglas Knowlton
• Heavy brain exercise: Dr. Casualene Meyer
  
• DSU's list of student and faculty blogs (and podcasts!)
• Brendan's I Hate Linux (not just tech)
• The Jackrabbit's Den
• Dr. John Nelson's Horseshoe Seven

I welcome more submissions! If you blog from Lake County, South Dakota, submit your blog below in the comments section.

Polls Say Wow, Pollsters Stay Put

I've been meaning to get to this for a while...

Every now and then we hear some optimistic news story about how South Dakota is so great for business. Most recently, Pollina Corporate released its "Top 10 Pro-Business States" list for 2007, on which South Dakota ranked 7th. (Pollina ranked us 3rd in 2006, 3rd in 2005, 6th in 2004.) Polls like this usually cite South Dakota's pro-business tax structure -- i.e., no corporate or personal income tax -- and low wages as factors in our relatively high rankings.

So a question: If pollsters like Pollina are such experts on business, and if their research shows South Dakota to be such a business haven, why aren't those pollsters moving here? Pollina is based in Chicago, Illinois, which state ranks 40th on Pollina's own rankings, but I haven't heard any talk of Pollina moving its headquarters or even opening a branch research office in South Dakota. Could it be that underpaying and overtaxing our workers isn't really the magic formula for economic growth?

Christian School Plants Roots Outside of Town

The Madison Christian School dedicated its new (and rather muddy) site southwest of Madison this week. I'm all for more educational options. The new steel building should be ready to take in new students by August 1.

Now I'm all for more educational options. When citizens are so motivated to educate their kids that they'll pass on the free education their tax dollars already fund and spend extra time and money to create a school of their own, that's a good thing.

The only problem I have with the new Christian school is its site: a mile out of town, all by itself in the middle of a bare field. Schools should be at the heart of a community, figuratively and literally. Kids should always see their school in the context of their community. Practically speaking, to get to school, kids (and teachers!) should be able to walk or ride their bikes to down city streets, past neighbors' houses and shops. Plunk a school out in the country, and nearly everyone will have drive to school (or take the bus, if the Christian School can afford one). Metaphorically, traveling to a school out by itself conveys a message of isolation, an impression that school is disconnected from the rest of our lives.

Of course, the Madison Christian School tried for a while to operate in the heart of the community. They had a great location at "Heaven's Castle," a funky old house across the street from West Center Baptist Church just two blocks from Main Street, but the fire marshall kicked them out. (Tangential note: The fire marshall also requires me to not put any posters on my classroom door and restrict my overall use of posters in my classroom to 10% of my wall space. I just hope he never looks in my cupboards and sees all those flammable books.) They rented space this year in old Washington Elementary, another lovely central location. Quite logically, the Madison Christian School wants a permanent facility, but with limited funds, they can't afford prime real estate in town. Plus, to save money, they have chosen to build a steel building that the fire marshall might love but which city zoning ordinances frown upon. So, again quite logically, they've chosen a bare site outside city limits where they will have more freedom to build the most practical school they can with the resources they have.

The same pressures that pushed the Christian School out of town have affected the public schools here as well. Fifty years ago, every school was part of a neighborhood. Then in the 1960s, we built our high school on the northeast fringe of town. In the 1990s, we abandoned our downtown junior high to attach a middle school to the high school. This year we finally abandoned our last neighborhood elementary schools to warehouse our young-'uns in a big building on the northwest edge of town. Even West Center Baptist plans to abandon its central location for a sprawling compound on Highway 81 north of town.

Fortunately, neighborhoods have expanded around the public school sites in Madison, so our schools do not stand completely isolated. Perhaps the Christian School will draw a similar expansion of housing (and trees -- gotta have trees!) so it doesn't stand alone on the prairie but rather anchors a lively, welcoming neighborhod.

Rounds and Long Play Hardball with Schools

If you're going to file a lawsuit, you've got to be prepared to play by lawyers' rules, which means you've got to be ready to play mean. That's what the more than 70 South Dakota school districts suing the state for more funding are finding out, as Attorney General Larry Long has asked for and the Legislative Research Council's Executive Committee has approved audits of the litigating schools. AG Long is going fishing: he wants to look for any indication that schools participating in the lawsuit have slipped up and illegally used public funds to support their suit against the state.

Now the audit probably won't turn up much: school districts and their business managers generally have their financial poop in a group, at least legally speaking. Their budgets are tight enough it is, they can't afford some illegal misappropriation that could impact their budgets later. But mistakes do happen, and this audit is an easy way for the AG and the governor to say, "You want make life hard for us? We can make life hard for you."

Alas, AG Long has every right to conduct this audit. We expect him to ensure that all other laws are enforced; the proper spending of public funds deserves the same oversight. But the political motivation is clear. That's what happens when we step out of the legislative arena and into the judicial to solve our problems. In the legislature, there's at least a chance for collegial collaboration, public officials working together toward a common goal. Once we go to court, we switch to adversarial mode, and the gloves come off. Lawyers (including attorneys general) can get nasty in ways they wouldn't think of in normal discourse. In adversarial mode, the lawyers' primary obligation is no longer to the truth ("Does the legislature provide enough money to the public schools? Can we find other revenue sources?") but to their clients, and they fulfill that professional obligation by using all the tactics and tricks they can think of to advance their case.

Don't get me wrong: as a debate coach, I teach kids to use the adversarial system. I'm all about the dialectic process as a means for synthesizing ideas and arriving at a better grasp of truth. But the legal dialectic process is ugly, and it is clear that the Rounds administration intends to play hardball throughout. In the course of this lawsuit, we can't expect the state to put its constitutional obligation to educate first and go easy on the litigating schools. Let's hope the schools are ready to give as good as they get.

Graduation Weekend -- It's All About Tomorrow

I'm in the middle of making graduation rounds. I attended a Madison reception this afternoon (Madison HS graduates its seniors tomorrow afternoon), and in a few minutes I head down to the Montrose HS graduation ceremony and receptions following.

Straight to the point: kids, be careful. First off, I'm going to be on the road, and I still have a good 17 years of daddying to do, at least. I don't want to get run over by some wild driver.

But more importantly, you graduates all have lifetimes ahead of you. You don't need to live on the edge by driving like stuntmen (which you aren't) or drinking yourselves stupid (which you don't have to be) or both. You're already living on the edge... of your futures.

Graduation is all about the future. High school is done; the real world awaits with more excitement than you will ever find in a bottle or a fast car. Nothing you might have the opportunity to do tonight (short of maybe an offer from aliens to travel the galaxy) is worth sacrificing all that lies ahead. Be safe tonight, and live for all the fun and challenges that tomorrow will bring.