Most Americans recognize, especially after looking at Milwaukee, that vouchers are simply an attempt to fund religious schools sice these are most of the takers. Elite schools don’t want the voucher students.

If one added a clause that religious schools are excluded from vouchers, there would be almost zero interest.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=91506

Scroll to divided court.

Non religious schools can receive vouchers as well “though few have”..

Doug, why aren’t you fighting to get catholic school funding here in Ontario stopped?  Unless you clarify, your objections smack of loathing some religions, but accepting others for public funds.
It’ll be interesting to see the positive results of Milwaukee’s voucher system!

I am afraid I don`t trust vouchers either.terrible responsibility for parents to try to “buy"a service for a failing child that works-before vouchers,an accreditation for services must take place-then YES to vouchers.The public must be protected,I know when we were on our journey,we fell into the hands of a few charlatans.

Below a more balance viewpoint on vouchers and students with disabilities, within the legal framework. As well as other elements of the voucher model.

http://www.ncd.gov/publications/2003/April152003

The main problem, is the unwillingness of both sides to track their students. The Arkansas longitude study is an attempt to answer the questions my link has posed under the legal framework.

In Canada, given the education model went on different pathways than the United States model, the Canadian education model developed by imposing and over riding the rights of the parents to guide their children’s education. What is identical for both education systems, is that the public education system are only legally required to provide a basic education.

Vouchers and other choices came into being, because both education systems have never put down in writing, what constitutes a basic education. In my eyes, it would be well grounded on the 3 Rs, as well as fluent and proficient in the 3 Rs. This was denied to my child, and what was provided would only ensure that my child would struggle throughout school, as well as closing future doors in her adulthood.

It is why some with the means, walk to the private schools, because the parents would have a way to avoid the public schools, and the various multi-facets infringing on parents right to guide their children’s education, as well as the best interests for their children. But for most Canadians, their options are limited depending on location, and province, and whatever constitutes a basic education for children. Within the Canadian legal framework, the legal questions arising from vouchers and choice as well as removing education decisions from the parents to imposing limitations have not been pondered by the courts extensively, as it has in the United States courts.

Resulting in the public education system as being the default button for all things education. The Canadian education systems, across this country is now paying the price, for setting limitations and infringing on the rights of parents to guide their children’s education and their children’s education. Parents have become accustomed to let the public education systems to make the decisions for their children, with little input from them. In fact, in the last 10 years or so, the input of parents have been limited and conditions put on via through the regulation regime as well as enacting laws to prevent parents from inserting their legal rights to guide their children’s education.

It has only been 5 years for the Arkansas study, and stronger effects have only been realized at this point. Parents are now just becoming comfortable adjusting to using their legal rights to guide their children’s education, as well as parents having options for their children. In another 10 years, vouchers and other options in United States, will probably have double or perhaps tripled, as more and more parents become comfortable and inserting their parental rights to guide their children’s education and best interests.

Meanwhile back at the home front, the Canadian public education is more intent in controlling and infringing on the rights of parents and students alike, as well as offering education opportunities beyond the basic education to a set of selected students, based on parameters that best suit the best interests of those within the public education system. Soon, the public education system will be paying a dear price for infringing on the rights of parents, and students, and in part, part of the payment will come in forms of vouchers and other choices.

I can tell you that from the 4 private schools we attended with a dyslexic child, only the Gow School in New York state delivered on research based remediation. That`s why I started my business, it was then and it is still morally wrong to put up a sign saying you have a product for these kids and you don`t deliver on the research that tells us what to do.

Parents don`t know what too look for, that`s why I said on Educhatter that hanging labels on children to buy a legal excuse for their failure has to be at the epicentre of all our concerns.
I also said that for every parent hanging out at the Learning Disabilities Association, they MUST become more professional and tell parents what to look for,otherwise we`re at the mercy of anything and anybody.

Parents don’t know what to look for, because the public education system is all to willing to block the information from the public, to prevent it from seeing the light of the day.

It is why I tried to do my bit, when I encountered misconceptions and the lack of knowledge that parents have. I tried to point them in the right direction, but more often it is the parents, and those within the education system who will verbally chide me for knowledge that is not pre-approved by the education system. Much like the P4E, when a parent cites or makes a complaint what the public education will not do, and they will jumped on the poster as a pack of hyenas going in for the kill, to make light of their comments, as well as chiding them for daring to question an education model that is the best in the world.

Doug, why aren’t you fighting to get catholic school funding here in Ontario stopped?  Unless you clarify, your objections smack of loathing some religions, but accepting others for public funds.
It’ll be interesting to see the positive results of Milwaukee’s voucher system!

I DO oppose catholic funding in Ontario as 70% of the population does. We are a bit stuck with some constitutional guarantees that MacDonald-Cartier dreamed up to molify Quebec in 1867, ironically Que. dumped their religious school system to make a French/English system.

The RC system will die as it secularizes over the years. The big problem would be compounding the problem by extending it to other religions. Luckily that was badly defeated and we are unlikely to ever see it again.

Here is hoping they don`t, their religious affiliation makes them much more child centric. That`s why their scores are better.
They seem more inclined to serve the population of children entrusted to them with public funds. I`m not Catholic.

Anyone familiar with the data knows that the difference is statistically insignificant and the demographic is very different with the PS system dealing with far more immigrants and poor people.

Those immigrants will be successful eventually, however there is a period of time that they will be behind. In fact given their different demographics it indicates that the PS system is doing a better job.

Prove it! That`s not the case anywhere I look.

Yes Doug, but the Toronto Catholic school board, does not allow non-Catholics to entered into their schools. So unlike the other Catholic school boards, that does allow non-Catholics into their schools. So Toronto, would show more immigrants as well as the low-income students who are non-Catholics.

If you check the history, Toronto was ground zero and became the battle ground for the emergence of the separate Catholic system.

Looking at the EQAO scores of overlapping boards is a pretty shallow analysis.

For many years, PS did better than RC but everyone knew that RC boards were absorbing large numbers of Italians and Portuguese immigrants plus they had the problem of a “below average” Franco-Ontarian community. Fewer graduated, went to university etc.

Today that situation has reversed. The vast majority of immigrants come from Asia although some come from Latin America, for some reason, most end up in public schools. Philipinos are the only mainly RC group of immigrants today and are dwarfed by the Chinese, Indian subcontinent, Caribbean and African groups that dominate PSs.

Not only are many of these ELL but more are poorer.

Jo Anne you will find out someday that achievement differences have very little to do with what goes on in schools and is primarily determined by who walks through the front door.

Deeper analysis is req’d.

Yes Doug, but the Toronto Catholic school board, does not allow non-Catholics to entered into their schools. So unlike the other Catholic school boards, that does allow non-Catholics into their schools. So Toronto, would show more immigrants as well as the low-income students who are non-Catholics.

???????

Insignificant.

I am out in the field as you know and I see a real difference,they think more child centrically,having a responsibility to the student and family is language they connect do,bringing success to the children as much as they can is a theme.

I think it`s philosophical,as you know,I am not Catholic but it fascinates me,I am also not a supporter of religious schools,if I had to vote,I would struggle,I see this real desire to assist.
Why can`t we get that philosophy going on in PS,I feel the admin staff need Roots of Empathy training.

Doug, you are comparing two education systems, as if they are using the same policies and the same education approaches. The only thing that is identical to both school systems, is the curriculum and standards that have been put in place by the ministry of education.

The Catholic education system, is more holistic when it comes to the education of children. More concern in reaching the full potential of the individual student, and providing for their learning needs. Once upon a time, this was not the case, but the Catholic schools now do at much better job at tending to the educational needs of their students especially the students who are at risked, than the public education system. A safer and more inclusive environment, and emphasis on achievement by teaching the skills needed to progress, to reach the potential of each student.

“The Ottawa Catholic School Board offers all our students a distinctive education with an emphasis on student success & spiritual growth. French language instruction, including Immersion options, offered from JK to grade 12, allows all students to reach their full potential. Access to technology creates a learning environment that engages our students and gives them the skills they need to excel.”
http://www.occdsb.on.ca/

As I had personally experience in Ontario, that the Catholic schools are much better in reaching the potential of students, compared to the public education system. If I was still living in Ontario, my youngest would be attending a Catholic high school, because of what I stated above, as well as attending the Catholic high school, one does not have to live in the catchment area of where the school is located. So unlike the public high schools, where one must live in the catchment areas, to attend. Just recently, in the Ontario location that I used to live in, 5 public high schools are are up for review, Only two are not under the threat of closing, and meanwhile the students in the Catholic high schools are hanging from the rafters to make room. No doubt as the public high schools close, the Catholic system will start to expand to make room for the disenfranchised public school students and their parents who are dealing with the closures of the high schools. By the way Doug, the Catholic schools in the Southern Ontario location, are outranking the public schools in achievement levels, as well as doing a better job on tending to the needs of students with disabilities.

Nancy,all school boards struggle to deal with identified students.Here,unusual but I disagree.
The Ministry asks simply for assessment and an IEP which leads to a dumbed down curriculum and accomodation,remediation is not on the agenda anywhere.

Early Reading intervention seems to be something school boards are required to do and I believe it`s because of the pressure of EQAO which is very important.Otherwise,there is no accountability anywhere.The public wouldn`t be able to “see"anything.
At the end of the day,public or private,it is the heart of the leader of the board that makes the difference!

Nancy,

I did not think you were so naive as to swallow the catholic board propoganda uncritically. The RC board is doing a good job, so is the PS board. The difference as always is who walks through the door, particularly when the results are not statistically significant.

True but it is the underpinnings of the philosophy of the Catholic system, that are more inclined to approached learning difficulties of students, that leads to better outcomes for these students.

Mind you it is based on my observations and personal experiences sending my children to the Catholic schools, as well as the LD parents on the forums who have expressed favourable thumbs up for the Catholic schools. Yes, both systems are rule bound, not very flexible, and leads to dumb-down curriculum, but the Catholic philosophy is less inclined to see students within the rule bound rules, and are more willing and flexible to work around the rules. I can’t help thinking, if I could go back and change the decisions that I have made regarding my child, would I have eventually transfer my child into the Catholic schools, if I had stayed in Ontario? 

Facebook is quite the social media, when it enables people to connect, to other parents who have not converse with each other since nursery school. I was the only parent that moved out of the province, and yet the majority of parents switch to the Catholic system, because they thought it was the better of the two systems. Likewise, there was four parents dealing with LD children and attention deficit disorders, who felt the Catholic system did the better job. The only reason why I know this, was the kids who attended the nursery school, search on face book, after being informed by some of the parents they saw my child’s name in the local newspaper. Now they knew the province, and my child just added another 100 friends to her facebook. Parents were curious about whatever happen to me, and my youngest child.

The main topic was on education and schools, and why I do insist that parents have a higher level of dissatisfaction with the schools, but for various reasons across the education spectrum. The 5 parents, including myself who have children with a disability, all agree that it is a real struggle dealing with both school systems, but the Catholic school system does a better job in looking out for the emotional welfare of these children, but not necessarily for their academic needs. At the end, if one has the money, go the private route to addressed their weaknesses that is hindering learning at school.

As a parent, I would have loved to be heard back in the early days, and taken seriously over the melt downs and tears that was a regular occurrence at home, but I was ignored for the most part, because she was a well-behaved student at school. Catholic schools take parents more seriously than the public education counterparts, and do want to hear from parents when things at home, will impact learning at school.

At the end of the day as you put it, it is the heart of the leader that makes the difference. So very true, and I just wish they were more leaders with heart, than the ones who are inflexible and rule bound to the regulations. Society would be a lot better off in my opinion.

Doug,what would you consider statistically significant,just curious?

True but it is the underpinnings of the philosophy of the Catholic system, that are more inclined to approached learning difficulties of students, that leads to better outcomes for these students.

Your opinion is exactly that, an opinion, not a fact.

http://www.geog.mcgill.ca/faculty/grade3ontario.pdf

Check the following study of EQAO grade 3 results. They conclude that the MAJOR factor was SES for school varience 67%. There were “in school” factors but those were class size (smaller class better results) and teacher experience, (10+ years better results.

Democraphics explains differentiated results not religion. As famous Canadian David Foot said in his book “Boom Bust and Echo” demographics does not explain everything, it explains 2/3 of everything. Pretty close.

There has been a sea change in immigration in the last 20 years and it has strongly affected PS v RC results. Still there is an insignificant difference, 1-2% here and there.

Doug, in the first place the McGill study uses “Multilevel modeling is a generalization of regression methods, and as such can be used for a variety of purposes, including prediction, data reduction, and causal inference from experiments and observational studies”
http://www.stat.columbia.edu/~gelman/research/unpublished/multi.pdf

The greatest weakness using this method for education research is interpreting causal inferences.

However, my beef especially dealing with looking at the education through multi-levels are the assumptions that are made, as well as data questions posed for the individual levels.

Take example, the number of books - 100 or more, which means nothing in itself. A hundred books which could be a 100 pocket novels, or a family that trades with other families in the neighborhoods , and only keeps a stock of 30 books at anyone time in their home. Or it could be a family, that makes use of the public library, or in today’s world, it is on the e-readers, and tablets.

Another example -

Proxy SES
Computer at home
More than 100 books at home

Home environment
Other language than English
Missing control for OLE
Parental involvement with school
http://www.geog.mcgill.ca/faculty/grade3ontario.pdf

Now Doug, if a computer and 100 books or more is the proxy for SES, it does not take a genius to figure that the hypothesis will be correct. Talk about shaping the questions, to fit the hypothesis. Rigged before the final numbers were even generated. Since it was for all of Ontario, the study is meaningless in terms of having value, as well as not having the important local economic variables, types of shelters as well as rentals or ownership, access to public libraries as well as health services, and list goes on. Than there is schools, no two school buildings are exactly alike, nor the resources. Then the community characteristics which was left completely out, and is the norm for these types of studies, and on the variable if it is a close-knit community. Close-knit communities have a distinct advantage to overcome SEC factors, as well as the willingness to share resources amongst themselves.

Throw in all the extra variables that are missing, I bet the conclusions would be much different.

Finally what really ticked me off, is the reference to split classes: “The split grade variable was used as a control in the regression models because placement of students in split-grade classes is often based on their age and abilities.”

Based on their age and abilities?  A reality in the rural schools , and I dare say it is no different in Ontario. And as I learned today, apparently split classes have been used by the educrats to closed down schools. Split classes is a given, dealing with small schools under 125 or in schools with declining birth rates.

Yes a sea change, but it also brings a sea change in values Doug. Sometime negative and sometimes positive and sometimes it is neutral. Such as the murder case on the front pages of the newspaper. The values are the kind that are not neutral or positive. And yet, we have our education system bending over backwards to incorporate their values, by eliminating the values that Canada was built on.

Oh I understand, I should listen to you and not the professors at McGill working for Statistics Canada.

I should have asked you first.

If we accept Doug’s claim that “immigrants and poor people” bring down results it’d follow that the holy of holies, Finland, which has a far less broad base of immigration than either the U.S. or Canada would have better educational outcomes, right?

Wrong John L, the OECD accounted for all of this by testing the immigrants that do go to Finland and found that they do better than the immigrants that go elsewhere. Everything has been considered before they declare the highly educated, almost no testing almost no private school equity = excellence Finnish, Deweyist system to be the best in the world.

Nancy, there is no “proxy for SES” read the study carefully, page 28 column #1 paragraph 3 “socio-economic profiles of school neighbourhood were derived from the CENSUS !

School type (public or catholic) more immigrants (-1) ESL 3, (OLE) (-1)

The conclusions are valid.

1) SES accounts for 67% of difference

2) In school factors of teacher experience (+10 years) and class size (lower) had a positive effect
on results (John Myers take note)

In conclusion we can do nothing about 2/3 of the imputs except reduce poverty. Of the 1/3 we CAN control, more teacher experience and low class size can improve results.

allow me John L.  - RIGHT!!  But then again you’d have to believe that we accept Doug’s claims. I sure don’t.

No doubt you’d have to know the ethnic, economic, linguistic makeup of immigrants who go to Finland vis whichever other countries you’re comparing it to.

As to the ole “smaller classes are better” thing that’s been done to death already.  There are all sorts of isues in determining the accuracy of that claim.

As to teachers with more experience being better that’s true only to a certain point, then the returns level off.  No doubt a teacher with experience is better, to a degree, is better than one with none, not unlike any other trade.  However if a teacher with several years experince isn’t perfectly capable it’d be time to move on to a new job.

1) The OECD looked into the immigrants biz John and certify that immigrants to Finland do beter than those going elsewhere. You need to realize that you are dealing with the most sophisticated agency on this topic.

2) This study for StatsCan says smaller classes= better results as most do.

3) This study compared 10+ years teachers to 10- years teachers. 10+ did better.

Did you read the study? I know it is not what you want to hear but StatsCanada has their name on it.

The difference between my “claims” Chuck and yours or John L.‘s is that mine are backed up by the most respected research agencies around. Yours, it seems, and John’s come right off the tops of your head with nothing to substantiate them.

Now you respect Statscan but when we show you that Canada has a 42 % adult literacy problem which I know is manufactured in the early grades you stamp your foot and say it isn`t so.

“On page 3 Doug - I did not picked the words out of thin air, and no direct connecting information regarding proxy SES. It was left up to the reader to sort out, otherwise a well written report.

It was pasted and copy in my last post.

Canada Census, cannot determined the unique aspects of a community, except in very general terms. Good for planning economic policies, not so good for planning education policy and more so in making inferences to the data streams by interpreting the data. PEI has the higher percentage of home ownership, and NL comes second, and Ontario is somewhere at the bottom of the list. Likewise, average incomes are below the average incomes of Ontarians, for both PEI and NL. And yet they have the higher percentages in home ownership.  Now can one infer that home ownership is one of the SEC variables for student achievement?  No way, and is just as ridiculous as seeing a home with a 100 or more books in a family home, as an indicator for the Proxy SES in the study. Why 100 books? Who and what factors laid behind the number of 100 books? 

One hundred books tells you nothing, except it is in the belief system of the researchers that 100 books or more in a family home has value when it comes to student achievement. But to implied that having 100 or more books at home, is one of the variables that impact the Grade 3 EQAO results. Plain foolishness, when there is a host of variables impacting the supply of reading material at home, and far more important to determined reading time in the home front. Difficult to measured, but it probably has a lot more to do with students ready to learn and being engaged in school, than the actual achievement on a standardized test.

Below is one of the many research items, on the use of proxy SES in the education research.
“In the meantime, researchers should be cautious in drawing inferences from research
reliant on the FSM measure. When used as the variable of interest, FSM status is an imperfect
proxy of low income or “workless” families, or one-parenthood. In the context of estimating
differences in educational attainment by family income, imperfect proxy bias is quite large.
When used as a control variable in an OLS regression, FSM status reduces omitted variables
bias to a moderate extent only. In other words, if omitted variables bias is a concern, then the
inclusion of FSM status in the model should do little to diminish this concern.”
http://cee.lse.ac.uk/ceedps/ceedp84.pdf

Just one of the many concerns when data sets such as free school meals or one hundred or more books in the family home are being used as the proxy in education research dealing with student achievement.

http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/89-552-m/89-552-m2008019-eng.pdf

Doug, the world’s most respected researchers are indeed looking into the education biases and inferences, that leads to faulty conclusions, and reference in my last post. At the end, it redirects scarce education funding dollars to research that have more to do with private agendas within the education system, than the actual achievement, as well as the best interests of all students.

Below, I check the link’s numbers to Canada Stats to confirm numbers are correct.

As for Canada, in the period between 1986 to 2010, 5.5 million immigrants on average and only 20 percent of the 5.5 million came from the European countries. On average 220,000 immigrants yearly came to Canada during the 25 year period.
http://www.lfpress.com/comment/columnists/salim_mansur/2012/01/13/19242536.html

The immigrants reflect 25 percent of the Canadian population, but in anyone year, the education system are dealing with 3.8 percent of new arrivals that will required the services and the funding of the provincial education systems, as well as other government departments including federal services.
My question Doug, since 25 percent represents the total of immigrants over the 25 year period, why are the numbers you cite significantly higher than the 3.8 percent and much closer or above the 25 percent of overall population that came from other countries?  Just wondering, because there is a significantly amount of resources and funding in the provincial systems, as well as numerous research taking place to address the needs of new immigrants, and far less focus and emphasis on the native born students, no matter where they hail from. Rural education research is the poor boy when it comes to research dollars, and rural policy planning, is one such example,  Would be rather novel, to compared the funding dollars directed to the sub-groups of students, by their SES variables, using a multilevel analysis approach. It would not surprise me if the greater percentage of funding dollars went to sub-groups that corresponds to large increases in the research being conducted.  LD, rural students, rural low-income students would be the poor cousins compared to their counterparts in Canada,

The choice engine in Canada, is just warming up Doug. The sea change will be choice, and not the education systems imposing their pet theories and spouting edicts, 100 books or more in a home is an indicator for future student achievement in their research. Affordable housing should be one such indicator for future student achievement, to where parents have excess dollars to buy items and services for their homes, that have educational value to help their children to succeed in school.

P.S. Finland’s yearly immigration is just above the 3 percent and climbing, under the Common European Union. Remember the current population of Finland is 5,259,250, plus the total number of immigrants is around 170,000. The current immigrant population in Finland, represent 3.23 of the Finland’s population. The Finland’s education system, does a far superior job in ensuring equity among all of their students, not in other countries in particular Canada. The provincial education systems does a poor job in not only providing for the individual students learning needs, and as well as providing services at the lowest benchmark standards,  that necessitates the need of fund raising by schools and parents, creating the have and have-not schools.

Easy, Doug.

  You’re more compelling when you don’t act all bitter and cranky

On the issue of an employee with more experience being more skilled than one with less you’ll note that only applies to a certain point.  It isn’t a straight line forever; if a teacher isn’t capable at 10 years they’ll not be capable at 20.

You are repeating yourself John. This study looked at teachers with 10+ and 10- years of experience. The former did better. Interestingly the teachers’ grid gives seniority raises up to 10 years and then levels off.

Doug, below an interesting study, that poses some thought provoking questions.

Even dare I say, you could agree with it.

“What does the correlation mean? Does improved equity (whether it’s gender equity or socioeconomic equity) automatically improve schools? Perhaps the privileged group is less likely to coast when they aren’t given every advantage and told they’re the “elites.”

Or does improved school instruction automatically improve equity? Perhaps the students with the most disadvantages have more to gain by better educational opportunities.

I submit that it doesn’t matter. What we can take away is that making schools better and making schools equitable go hand in hand. Since both things are desirable (to most of us, I hope), we have really good news. It’s possible to have better educational opportunity for everyone. Surely we can all get behind that. Is it finally time to reconsider the sink-or-swim, laissez-faire economics approach some politicians are promoting?”

Read more: http://www.care2.com/causes/equal-is-better-whats-missing-from-the-debate-on-education-reform.html#ixzz1jwWb7XVY

In the comment section, about half way there is a series of 4 separate posts in a row that is one long post, by a person who was educated in the Finland education system.

“So I hope you see that it isn’t just one factor you need to change in America to make a more equal school (and society), but there are many. Not all of the above is essential, still it’s more about the structure of society and the point that humans all have their own capabilities but still are equal, than about a method of teaching or anything like that.”

In the fourth post, “I feel that school today in Finland has gone downhill, and there are a lot of problems (e.g. how difficult it can be to fire a teacher not doing a good job, although the good side of this is it gives the teacher more energy to focus on the children instead of thinking about how to keep one’s job or if one dare take a loan for a house when there is no saying if one will be fired by next semester). But there is a widespread debate of these problems, all from the student themselves and their parents to the Minister of Education, and even if all of it isn’t constructive, a lot is.”

As I noted combing through the Finland web sites, but the study itself is of interest, because it does suggest that education policy and practices need to be change because it is a combination of factors, and not solely the SES factors as well as formulating achievement policies based on providing equity, rather than funding education by equal amounts of education dollars, and call it equality. Far from it, the current formula structure provides the foundation for the have and have-not schools, and inequality for all students, except for those who work within the system, and their pocketbooks.

Apparently teachers, like just about eevry other job, improve with experience, to a point.  Hard to find much on this topic to bicker about, Doug.  Move on.

As I noted combing through the Finland web sites, but the study itself is of interest, because it does suggest that education policy and practices need to be change because it is a combination of factors, and not solely the SES factors as well as formulating achievement policies based on providing equity, rather than funding education by equal amounts of education dollars, and call it equality. Far from it, the current formula structure provides the foundation for the have and have-not schools, and inequality for all students, except for those who work within the system, and their pocketbooks.

I don’t support equal money for students, I believe in compensatory education which means the poorer the school the more money it receives and the richer the school the less it receives. If you want to use reading scores instead of SES I am fine with that.

How to help poor kids achieve. I kept witing for these guys to say choice or phonics or something like that. Kinda vague but not in there?

http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2012/01/18/17rebell.h31.html?tkn=LMTFBydrYOk8Fj6IyOAGSci3B3XiXL0y331u&cmp=clp-edweek

Doug, the link is to introduce the idea of introducing laws.

” Access to these comprehensive educational services is a legal right and must be made available to all children, not merely to some children when political trends and budget cycles coincide.”

It will never happen having comprehensive educational services such as family engagement, out of school time and so forth as a legal right for all children.

I am started to see a few more articles implying rights based on income. The lower the income the more that a student is entitled to free health and enhanced educational services. In the article it quotes a $4200 yearly from birth to 18 1/2 years old, of what it would cost extra. No guarantee that the families would take advantage, or used the services.

I am still waiting for the other shoe to drop, for a set of laws to force families of low-income to use the services provided or go to jail.