|
Opinion
Controversy
over schools may have hidden benefits
February
18, 2005
If
winter comes, spring, summer and fall are sure to follow.
Likewise, anytime an issue of public interest comes up, some
kind of rally more than likely won’t be far behind. Very often
it’s two rallies, one supporting each side. Sometimes, of
course, there are three if there happens to be a middle
ground.
Two opposing sides did rally at the Statehouse in
Columbia this week in an effort to make sure lawmakers are
aware of what’s at stake in a dispute over education.
Those
pro and con rallies were not surprising, of course. The “Put
Parents in Charge” education initiative by Gov. Mark Sanford
has, right from the beginning, attracted its share of praise
and criticism. So what else is new?
They say politics makes
strange bedfellows. It’s certainly true in this case.
THOSE LINED UP AGAINST “Put Parents
in Charge” include the South Carolina Education Association
(the teachers’ union), the School Board Association, the
Association of School Administrators, and the state
Superintendent of Education. What makes this strange? These
groups don’t always see eye-to-eye. There are other parties,
to be sure, but these are enough to indicate
diversity.
Information designed to influence public opinion
is flooding the state from both sides. A good bit of material
opposing the proposal has come from school districts, too, and
has involved some superintendents and other personnel.
The
public might reasonably and legitimately wonder if this is a
practice commensurate with what school districts should be
doing. Should they be involved in partisan politics? After
all, taxpayers on both sides of the issue contribute heavily
to school district budgets.
BE THAT AS IT MAY,
THIS is a subject that has shown how South
Carolinians feel about their children and their schools, and
that’s not bad. Pro or con, if the concern is about children,
good. If about something else, such as turf protection, then
it should be closely scrutinized by taxpayers.
One of the
primary benefits of both Columbia rallies should be obvious to
everyone. It means that people are taking more interest and
getting more involved in the education of their children. That
involvement, or lack of it, has been a source of concern for
some time.
It’s a shame that it has to be wrapped in
controversy. Still, it has more people than ever analyzing
their schools. In a state where apathy is a constant reality,
this controversy may be beneficial in ways unexpected.
Editorial expression in this feature represents
our own views.
Opinions are limited to this page.
| | |
|
|
| | |
|
|
