Sunday, December 09, 2007

Home-Schooling with WIVA - Part 2

Since first posting about the Court of Appeals decision that eliminated funding for the so-called Wisconsin Virtual Academy (WIVA) last week, I have had a fairly active and interesting comment thread (as has, way on the other side of the issue, Rick Esenberg).

I spent some time engaging on the comments with some of the usual suspects saying the usual things – Dad29: "In the end, the Leftist State will have unfettered power and control over all its citizens. So the ideology is about control (power.)"; karl marx: "What a surprise!! Mike Plaisted is against children and for the UNION." There were also the K12 talking-points to deal with on mainstream radio (MSR) and the wing-nut blogs – you know, WEAC is just interested in money and protecting their union hacks in the classrooms; the opinion means we can’t help our kids with homework anymore; and blah-di blah blah.

In challenging the usual suspects about the decision, I asked a pretty good question, I thought. The right-wing completely ignored the part of the opinion that said the scheme failed because the teachers and students were not "located" in the district. On Esenberg's comment thread, I asked: if the Northern Ozaukee district created a charter school where the administrators were in the district and the teachers and students reported every day to a building in Milwaukee, do you think that would be in compliance with the statute? Niether Esenberg or anyone else answered that one, because apparently they couldn't. I asked them twice.

But the most interesting comments were from some newcomers who said they were WIVA parents. As you could imagine, they were appreciative of the scheme that allows them to use what is apparently the Cadillac of home-schooling support for free. I don’t begrudge their use of the service as long as it’s offered and not surprised they think it’s pretty useful and cool. They can’t help it if they have been put in the middle of the battle between the K12 profiteers and the usual Wisconsin public school destroyers on one side and the taxpayers, WEAC and the law itself on the other. The home-schoolers enrolled in the WIVA program have been sold a bill of goods, which is no less painful just because they aren’t paying for it.

But I do take issue with a false differentiation that they and the profiteers’ defenders attempt to make between WIVA and home-schooling itself.

Most eloquent on this point was a commenter named "borges":
  • " a homeschooling family that has had one of my kids jump ship and join a public virtual school, I can confirm that the virtual school is completely different than real homeschooling. She answers to her teachers, who make the assignments, grade her progress and call all the shots. It is truly public schooling. If I have an idea for primary sources my kid should read in history, or an interesting experiment for Biology, too bad for me. Obviously I'm not enthusiastic about public education as a one way stream of information and expertise, but there you have it. Welcome to the big house. So don't anyone confuse virtual public schooling and homeschooling. They are completely different world."

In response, I would say that, just because you are not "calling all the shots" and you are taking direction from an actual publicly-employed teacher doesn’t mean what you are doing is any less home-schooling. (Oh, and, by the way, there is nothing stopping you from sharing your primary sources or the Biology experiment with your kid. In fact, any brick-and-mortar teacher would encourage it.) It is just the same as if you had purchased one of the more elaborate software/online home-schooling packages from, say, K12 directly. In such a scenario, you may even have to agree to have your student evaluated by an educator other than yourself. Just because you have latched onto a version of home-schooling that differs from your original conception – for good or ill, home-schooling is defined as whatever the home-schooler decides it is – that doesn’t make what you are doing any less home-schooling. You are still primarily responsible for making sure your child follows the lessons and does the work. You are a home-schooler, whether you know it or not.

There is no question that K12/WIVA thinks their market is home-schoolers. Try Googling homeschooling. What do you think comes up in the featured "sponsored links" box at the top of the page, a spot that is only allowed to those who pay fairly big money to get there? Sure enough – it’s WIVA. You get the same result if you try homeschooling books ("WI Virtual Academy has textbooks, materials, and loaner computers," the tag reads), homeschooling tools and, interestingly, Christian homeschooling ("Virtual Academy provides textbooks materials at no cost to you."). Your tax money at work – spending thousands with Google to make sure homeschoolers notice WIVA when shopping for support services. Free textbooks! Where do I sign up??

Or just go to the K12 website, which helpfully directs you to a "Virtual Academy" in your state (you didn’t think WIVA’s name was of local origin, did you?), not to mention "K12 Consumer Direct", for those poor slobs who haven’t been able to pry public funds out of their state for K12's expensive home-schooling products.

If you want Wisconsin to support home-schooling with public funds, go get a bill through the legislature. Surely, interested parties like WEAC will be there to try to stop it, just as the wealthy profiteers will bring their considerable assets to bear – including MSR squawkers and, no doubt, the Journal Sentinel’s tedious in-house wing-nut, Patrick McIlerhan (parroting the K12 talking-points on the decision, he unimaginatively offered: "They're unlicensed; ergo, the school's illegal. Let this be a warning when your tot asks for homework help." Why bother listening to Sykes when you can read the same crap from McIlerhan two days later?).

But let’s have that conversation straight up, eyes wide open, rather than allow the schemers to siphon more school funds away from the public schools with a phony bastardization of the charter/open-enrollment/school funding law. Maybe, while the interested parties are so engaged, the rest of us who are concerned about decent, accountable public schools can have some input as to whether home-schoolers should get public money (not to mention how much) to support what is essentially an elitist exercise that is only available to the increasingly-rare family that can have at least one parent at home all day to facilitate it.

Knock yourself out, if you can pull it off, but you are -- or should be -- on your own.


Anonymous said...

This issue amazes me because its all about parents that don't want to send there kids to public schools but want the public schools to help them keep there kids at home.

Anonymous said...

How about seting up the reverse: administration in Milwaukee, instead -- and students from there meeting in homes in Ozaukee County?

That would be an incentive to fund the homeschooling parents, who say they do it so much better than public schools, if they also homeschooled some Milwaukee kids -- in their exurban homes. Parents are writing that their homeschooling doesn't take the five hours a day required by the law, so at only three or four hours a day of schooling, that could get the Milwaukee kids bussed back and forth to and from Mequon in a shorter day than they have now.

I could back a law that allows that.

Anonymous said...

The "STATE" has decided WIVA should be shut down but the "STATE" does nothing about the failing Milwaukee Public Schools.

A while back a public school union official stated: "When students start paying union dues we will start looking out for the interests of students, until then, we will look out for the interests of dues paying teachers".

One of these days a substantial majority of Wiscosnsinites are going to figure out that Wisconsin's "government run" public school monopoly "IS" the problem.

WEAC and the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction are far more interested in what's best for teachers, administrators, and education bureacrats. What's best for students comes second.

The only solution is to breakup the Wisconsin education monopoly. Statewide taxpayer vouchers for private school alternatives is the only way we will ever see the education innovation we so desperatly need in this state.

Anonymous said...

Well, yes, a union represents its workers. I don't expect the auto union folks in Kenosha to represent me as a car buyer.

But teachers speak out in other ways for students all the time, so it's simplistic and rather convenient to equate what WEAC says with everything that teachers say -- and do -- to speak for, say, Milwaukee public schools.

Teachers speak out on city and state budgets to get more funds for students. So does DPI, so that's also wrong to say it only speaks for WEAC. Research state budget records, hearings, etc., and see.

My mayor in Milwaukee spoke for the schools in the state budget, too -- but wasn't heeded by legislators from outside the city, who continue to not fund the mandates they make only for Milwaukee, in the schools and in other matters. Nice how that works for them and theirs. . . .

AnotherTosaVoter said...


Your juvenile tone does little more than the moronic platitudes by Dad or Belling to further the debate. Are you really a college-educated attorney or are you a 13 year-old?

Anyway what I notice is that the primary focus of your argument is defending the system, instead of concentrating on what works best for the kids. Your question to other bloggers is indicative: it's about the merit of the opinion and how it relates to protecting the current system, as if that's really the most important issue here.

Yes, the opinion might be technically correct based on the law. But if that's the case, and you have parents complaining that their child is now missing out on an arrangement with which they excelled, it ought to beg the question of how we change the law to continue this system so that a court's opinion doesn't prevent kids from excelling.

In other words, your question focuses on the fact that having the kids learning at home with such significant parental involvement isn't substantially different from homseschooling. So what? The kids are doing well and being taught by accredited teachers. And so a profit is being made - again so what? The kids are doing well. Profit or not that's the key issue.

I hope you'll consider examining whether your priorities lie with the system instead of the kids. Systems should never trump effectiveness. Nor should partisan victory.

Anonymous said...

ATV, Mike may be writing in a larger context of conversation on other blogs as well -- by WVA parents repeatedly asserting that there is a difference between virtual schooling and home schooling . . . even though virtual schooling (aka WVA) is schooling and in the home.

That is, ATV, you may need to say what you're saying to those parents telling us that virtual schooling is not home schooling, so virtual schooling ought to continue to get public tax funding from us, etc.

Anonymous said...

This is not going to fly.
No teacher teaching. Period.

Get with the program, home schooler voucher vultures.

Mike Plaisted said...

I love this stuff from ATV: "Yes, the opinion might be technically correct based on the law. But..." But, nothin'. If you want home-schooling for be supported by tax dollars, get a new law allowing it. Jay Bullock has a great post today explaining how, at times like this, right-wingers clamor for the kind of ignore-the-law "judicial activism" they decry in other contexts. "Who cares about the law as long as what we are dong works?" is not a great legal or public policy argument -- especially here, where you can do what you want in home-schooling, you just can't get the state to pay for it without a change in the law.

As for the "system" vs. the "kids" -- my advocacy for a strong public school system is not exclusive to a concern for the kids -- in fact, a good system with good resources and small class sizes is good for more kids. Anony 11:28 above comes clean with the real motivation of the K12/WIVA schemers: "The only solution is to breakup the Wisconsin education monopoly." Vouchers and peeling off public money to throw at K12 is one way destroy the public schools, to the detriment of all.

The public schools provide a more equal opportunity in life for all, a fact that the anti-school crowd just can't stand. The profiteering vultures circle the public schools, like defense contractors waiting to swoop in to take advantage of gullible legislators and a mis-informed public. I'm proud to stand for a "system" that works for all kids, or at least tries to.

Anonymous said...

"The profitering vultures circle the public schools". Yea right, schools like St. Gregory the Great on 60th and Oklahoma or St. Anthony's are about as far from vultures as you can get. Why don't you be honest with yourself. Many voucher schools in Milwaukee offer a much better better education at about half the cost. WIVA also is providing educations in a more cost effective manner. Your problem is obvious, your trying to kill competition. I wish I could get rid of the competitors in my business, but it doesn't work that way in the real world. New innovative educations methods are just getting started in this country. You, nor anyone else in public school monopoly business are going to stop the wave.

Anonymous said...

I hear a lot of "market" rhetoric being used in these responses. I like the market, when it comes to going to the grocery store to buy food, going to a store to buy clothes, or buying goods at a department store.
Why do we want to take a business model and use it in public education. The purpose of a business or a corporation is to make money, and you do that by eliminating costs, reductions of services, or a reduction in labor. It is not a guarantee that every business will last. Take a look at any eating establishment, many will fold shop after 1-2 years.
How does this philosophy better our public schools? Why should taxpayer money be going to support a private education? We can all agree that property taxpayers share a much higher burden for funding our public services(including education). People can certainly home school their children or send their kids to a private school. Families need to do what is best for them, but must realize that taxpayer money is meant to support public education and public services.
Applying market theory to our education is bound to create massive conflicts of interest. If a school business is not making money, they must cut costs(equipment,labor, resources, and offer fewer children to be educated)That is the same logic that is going on in the health insurance industry. They are using "free market" practices, and our costs are going up, our society is becoming sicker, and our standards of health lag behind some third world countries. Is this the road we want to go down with education?
And for those children who do not attend a public school, the government can still play a major role in providing stable transportation, safe neighborhoods, and good colleges so that teachers can be well educated to teach our children(private and public)

Mike Plaisted said...

All good questions, Anony 11:41. What DOES "market theory" have to do with public education? Nothing, of course. The right-wing uses the phony "theory" to gain credibility for its efforts to destoy public education. They know that when you start throwing fancy concepts around like "market theory", the mainstream media will eat it up, or at least not challenge its false premise.

Make no mistake -- the right-wing wants to destroy public education for a couple of reasons. For one thing, a truly effective education system provides a better chance for equal opportunity for people the elite have no interest in letting in their door, except to clean their floors. They also see government-funded private education as another economic opportunity, like a defense contractor with a fresh war to supply.

The right-wing cries crocodile tears for the poor inner city kids trying to get an education, but they care as much about those kids as they do about women trapped in burquas in Muslim countries -- it's just a wedge to create a new generation of education profiteers, like those fine fellows who brought you Alex's Academy of Excellence and the Mandela School.

And, when the "market theory" lie plays itself out, they'll be out with another poll-tested dodge to keep the ball rolling, they think, in their direction. Notice the comments above, where those faced with the falsehood of their lie that WIVA is somehow different from home-schooling, try to move the goalposts. Now, it's "so what" if WIVA is home-schooling. Sometimes, when really backed up against a wall, they'll say what they really mean and prove their true intentions: "The only solution is to breakup the Wisconsin education monopoly." Again, they can't have the debate straight-up -- they have to spin and call things what they are not.

Anonymous said...

Anoy 11:41 misses the point of what this debate should be about. It is about choice and a private entity--WEAC--which is interested in restricting choices. If we were to follow Anoy's logic, how could we justify sending all those welfare checks out to people to use in the way they see fit? Who wouldn't take issue when the govt. truck rolled up to drop off the recommended supply of nutrients? No. America is about choice.

Mike wants to run his hate-speech about conservative motives, but he's really about keeping poor kids in failing schools. He claims the right wants to keep the little man down, but that's a load of crap. To keep the little man down, just keep doing what we're doing.

The stupid left always wants to claim that the right wants to destroy public education--as if it held some sort of sacred position in its current incarnation. But what they don't want to accept is that in many areas it is already destroyed. If for example the power system in Milwaukee was as reliable as the schools, we'd have power 40% of the time.

Something has to change. We cannot change parents. We cannot change teachers. We cannot change the system. What's left? The Virtual School movement as well as other unrelated programs like School Choice gave parents the chance to make a choice and stand by it. Further, if parents feel entitled to the money that would otherwise go to failing public schools to de-educate their sons and daughters, I can see where their coming from. Choice in education is a social justice issue: it is a crime to force students into failing situations to maintain the WEAC monopoly.

Anonymous said...


I'm amazed how hard you and your fellow education monopolists will fight to kill any form of competition.

As I said before, alternatives to the public school monopolies are here to stay. You might as well learn to live with it.

Concerning your efforts to kill WIVA, I doubt you will succeed.

Mike Plaisted said...

Oh, and Anony 11:41, this is what the right-wing is reduced to when they are really losing the agrument: Patrick -- "Mike wants to run his hate-speech about conservative motives, but he's really about keeping poor kids in failing schools." Apparently, they are so threatened by the truth that they call it hate-speech. Oh, and by the way, I want to keep poor kids in failing schools. He doesn't know me and I never said that so... See how it works?

Patrick and his kind-hearted allies say they just want to break up the educational "monopoly"; they just want to give us "choice". Who could be against that? Of course, there is no "monopoly" -- the public schools are created as a valuable service, run by separate school districts all over the state, elected by the locals, the vast majority of which provide some of the finest public eduation in the nation. There is no "monopoly" -- you can take your kids and home-school them or put them in a private school. That's your choice. Nobody's stopping you.

Sure, there are some schools in Milwaukee and in other poor pockets of the state where students don't do so well on standardized tests. Big surprise, isn't it? School achievement has always tracked class on bell-shaped curves -- partly because the tests (like IQ) are culturally biased, but, mostly, because some kids come to schools from choatic homes and lives, some without sleep the night before or breakfast in the morning. When they first attend school in kindergarten, some of them have never seen a book before. They start from behind and sometimes stay there, despite the schools' best efforts.

Consigned to failure? I don't think so. There are heros in the schools everyday, who close the doors to their classroom and do the best they can, some with remarkable results. We know what works in these situations: good teachers, smaller classrooms and adequate materials and support. These are elements Patrick and his ilk would deny the schools that need it the most. They are "failed" don't you see, unworthy of our support.

The "choice" program and flights of fancy like home-schooling with WIVA solves none of this. In fact, many choice schools are a joke, with uncertified, un qualified teachers and owners who cash the easy state check and head for the Mercedes showroom. Slightly better are the established Catholic schools, but in those cases much of your tax money goes to religious indoctrination. But, even in those schools, most good teachers follow the money -- they are in public schools.

So, do we try to make our public schools better or throw money are charlatans and priests? No, that's what people who are actually interested in the average inner-city student's success would say. You don't ever want to confused these right-wingers with one of those.

Oh, and Anony 5:48 -- I don't have to try to kill the WIVA home-schooling scheme. As a publicly-funded entity, it's already dead -- or will be as soon as the Supreme Court declines to hear any further appeal.

Anonymous said...

God forbid we try something innovative.

To all those who say the "private market" idea won't work, consider the following:

A private company is in the business of making money, it's true. They do that not by cutting costs, but by offering a superior product/service at a fair price.

You say that the private market will lead fewer educational opportunities for kids. But that's already happening in public schools, as music and art and other programs get cut. Oh, and costs are continually rising.

The private market works, in almost every case. It rewards things like efficiency, accountability and results.

David Casper said...

Patrick said:

"Mike wants to run his hate-speech about conservative motives, but he's really about keeping poor kids in failing schools."

To which Mike responded:

"He doesn't know me and I never said that..."

Yet in an earlier comment, Mike said:

"Make no mistake -- the right-wing wants to destroy public education for a couple of reasons. For one thing, a truly effective education system provides a better chance for equal opportunity for people the elite have no interest in letting in their door, except to clean their floors."

I guess I'm failing to see the difference here.

Other Side said...

Where's the hate, Dave? Right-wingers like Patrick use use words like liberal, libtard, moonbat, etc. like a tar brush, but we don't call you guys haters for using them.

It's harsh commentary, but certainly absent any hate. The only hate I see getting thrown around is from Patrick.

My other thought is if one is so thin-skinned to begin thinking every commentary is hateful if it disagrees with one's beliefs should probably find another forum ... kind of like singing in the shower. :)

AnotherTosaVoter said...

This debate has devolved into an episode of monkeys humping a football, as spats between political hacks usually do.

Mike, you fall victim to the same guilt by association logical fallacy as the poster who commented on the union clown who talked about kids and union dues. Because I disagree with you, I'm with the "other" which is made up only of some mythical right wing that is out to destroy public education.

I disagree with you because you plainly seek to defend the system. You equate good education for kids with the system to which you are emotionally attached. Your argument makes it clear. Parents post and speak on the radio about how their children prospered under WIVA and all you can do is mock them. You claim only small class sizes in brick-and-mortar schools works "for everyone". I have news for you Mike, systems are like religions are like political ideologies: not a single on works for everyone.

Unencumbered by your emotional attachment to ideology, I favor both the system as it exists - with enough resources for kids to succeed who should or have to be in brick-and-mortar schools, and enough resources and enough freedom to allow kids to take advantage of innovative ideas like WIVA and any other idea that achieves results.

Hacks are all the same. They become emotionally attached to only those tools approved by their ideology. Because of this attachment, they'll gladly refuse a tool that might work if it has the wrong label. It's not about results, it's about feeling good about the intent.

Mike Plaisted said...

ATV: "monkeys humping a football" know, you could live your whole life and not see imagery as beautiful as that. I used to know a dog that humped a pillow, but, monkeys...footballs...I always appreciate a nice turn of phrase.

Here's the thing...either you believe and commit yourself to public eduation or you don't. If I thought everything had been tried to improve public schools and failed, maybe I'd think these wild experiments might be worth a public dollar. And, if any of the right-wingers like Patrick and the Bradley Foundation profiteers had ever shown the least bit of interest of trying to repair the public schools before lurching into schemes that just happen to put money in their benefactors' pockets, maybe I would take their pious claims of concern for the poor a little more seriously. But they didn't and I don't.

And, I think I've been respectful of the WIVA parents that have been caught in the middle of this power and money grab by the right-wing. I'm sure they got used to this Cadillac of home-schooling support being provided at taxpayers' expense -- I mean, who wouldn't be pissed? But they should be looking at the political hacks who strung them along, knowing full well that they were not in compliance with state law. They are a pawn in their game, not mine.

AnotherTosaVoter said...

Your response is absurd.

In addition to being emotionally attached to the status quo, you're partially opposed to options like the WIVA because of who supports it. Your argument is religious in nature - you believe you have license to the truth and anyone who disagrees is beholden to the devil. Because they're evil, they're entirely to blame for the battle being fought.

You're literally arguing that somehow it only takes one to tango.

Unlike all you hacks who need to apply your ideology-approved solution to everyone, I think there should be options. If a kid can and does succeed with something like WIVA, then parents should have the resources to make it work. For those parents who cannot use WIVA or for kids who don't succeed in WIVA, there should be other options - including quality brick and mortar schools and whatever innovative ideas people - be they right wing, left wing, union, religious, or whatever else think up. A good idea is good regardless of who thinks it up. That's something hacks can never get past. Hacks judge ideas only on who thinks them up.

Mike Plaisted said...

OK, I think I'm starting to get your "hack" point. I'm sorry that I can't take the right-wing "arguments" against public schools and for schemes like WIVA at face value. There is too much money and power at stake for the powers that make up the Bradley Foundation cabal for me or anyone else to assume that their motives are totally or even partially with concern for the children primary in their minds. The fact of profit and political motive is always relevant. That doesn't mean they are the "devil", but it does expose their self-interest.

As for me, I know a lot of teachers, a lot of students and some folks in several teachers unions. There's nothing "religious" about my interest in the success of public schools -- it is simply a fairly well-reasoned and formerly-uncontroversial commitment to public education. It seems to me the burden is on those who would have relatively elitist options such as private education and home-schooling funded by the taxpayers to make the case why this should be. Regardless of how some kids might benefit from this option or other, the focus should be the success and funding for the majority of the students that make up the majority of the schools.

It is uncontroverted that the most effective improvement in public schools is lower class sizes. The day I see the Braley Foundation come out in favor of that is the day I give the right-wing any credit at all for giving a good god damn. Because they really don't.

Anonymous said...

Instead of going into long, self-serving, bloviating dialogues...why not just have every post be titled "The Right Wing is Evil"? It seems to be the gist of every single article you write.

borges said...

Well this conversation has devolved a bit in a few days. I have to thank Mike for quoting me in this post and even calling it articulate. I'm sorry I was not more persuasive in splitting the differences between homeschooling and virtual schooling. I see from the combative comments here that the lines were drawn and territory staked out on both sides long ago. I am probably the only parent in this discussion who homeschools and has a daughter in virtual schooling, and I find both sides of this argument lacking.

The discussion of smaller class size might be a beginning, but I think it goes beyond that to school size. I think many things in our modern life do not scale up well: schooling, religion, medicine, farming, to name a few. There are seductive aspects of bigger that compel us to scale up, but I think we lose our goal in the glitz of more options in curriculum, science labs, theater productions, a better sports team. The goal of school from my perspective is cultivating learning individuals who can question and find answers, communicate that information effectively, and who want to participate and contribute to better society. Instead our public schools require students meet the demands of the system and as a reward get a diploma chunked out at the end. We can do better, but I think not within schools scaled beyond a neighborhood. Using the virtual school model small schools can have a world of options open to them, but still retain a rootedness in community.

On the issue of the Milwaukee situation and elitism, I have a limited perspective on that sitting out here in SW Wisconsin, although my teacher on these types of issues is Paulo Freire. If you read his work you see teacher and student as co-learners who explore the object of study with curiosity and wonder. This is my experience in homeschooling my children. I imagine it can be done in small community schools, with teachers free to truly teach. Well. I can imagine a different kind of system, but as Mike says there are monied interests (probably on both sides) in this who will not see profit in the ideas of Paulo Freire.

Anonymous said...


I am just curious about what you think about Connection Academy since that virtual school uses a different curriculum. Do you view Calvert as you do K12? How come the WEAC has not sued Connections Academy which is based out of Appleton? Thanks

John Washburn said...


You know better.

WIVA is not home schooling.

What I can't figure out if you accept this lie from Bill Bennett, K12, and WEAC because you are ignorant of actual home schooling, think WIVA actually is home schooling or if it is just convenient to accept it because you are so deeply enammored woth Prussian Commons Schools

John Washburn said...

But are you committed to educating the public or public education?

The truth is the two are not the same.

So which do you prefer: an educated public or cumpulsary public education? I am convinced you can't have both.

Anonymous said...

Connections Academy WAS taken to court by WEAC before WIVA--this is their 2nd try. "According to a press release from the Wisconsin Coalition of Virtual School Families WEAC has attempted to close two strong public virtual schools in the state. A suit brought against Connections Academy in 2003 was dismissed by the courts."

Anonymous said...

WIVA, which my child attends is not traditional homeschooling.

I did not want my child in a bricks and mortar school. The main reason is that often in WI there is another agenda other than the child's teaching in play.

I am going to ask several questions...I am sure this will get me rhetoric, but here goes:

1. I pay taxes like anyone else. Why can this amount go towards a charter school like WIVA (since apparently some of the posters out there think WIVA parents are getting a free ride). Since I pay as much or probably more than most, why not a successful, teacher led school like WIVA?

2. If WEAC teachers support WIVA, why does the leadership of WEAC reject it? A HUGE majority of teachers support this school. My bet is, they do not want competition to erode their control. I see no other plausible explanation but unlike WEAC leaders, I am willing to listen.

I placed my daughter in WIVA because it had and was run with public school teachers and was NOT traditional home schooling. It met or exceeded the standards. It does not cost more than a bricks and mortar school, but less.

Did it occur to you that with proper legislation, this cost could drop further with a larger enrollment?

Again, I CHALLENGE anyone to show me that this is not WEAC trying to stamp out choice.

Anonymous said...

Excellent blog. Good job. Very informational. 19 Million Visitors To Your Web SiteGuaranteed -- And It's FREE!

Anonymous said...

I have tried a lot of different programs and
found "Family Funds" to be one of the best,
They care about your success, It's easy to do
and I make about $50.00 dollars a day but it's
been growing monthly so the extra $1500 dollars
a month has been helpful, give it a try.