FORUM
Open the
doors of
opportunity
? ? +
Darrell
Allison
Guest
Columnist
Leaders in the North
Carolina Senate recently
released a budget which
seeks to expand the
Opportunity Scholarship
Program over the next
decade. Bold and timely, I
applaud this measure
because it would meet ,
parental demand. Over
22,000 applications have
flooded into the Program
from North Carolina fami
lies in just three year
sproof positive of the
growing 'need for educa
tional choice. This pro
gram, which provides
scholarships for low
income students to attend
private schools, is empow
ering parents to select the
school that best meets their
children's needs.
How's it working out?
Fayetteville mother Tanya
Johnston, whose daughter
receives an Opportunity
Scholarship, says, "I'm '
one happy parent who
would stand before anyone
and testify that these
changes have encouraged
and positively affected my
daughter, Joy, for the bet
ter." Kim Paylor of
Raleigh says, "This school
' year, utilizing the
Opportunity Scholarship,
my son is making solid
academic gains. And due
to the school's 'no toler
ance' towards bullying...
he can finally be free to be
the best he can be."
Such parental affirma
tions, and many others I
have heard, are heartening
and embolden us to act.
Families have submitted
nearly 8,100 new student
applications for 2016-17,
including more than 3,000
renewals. However, cur
rent funding allows just
6,200 scholarships.
Without intervention,
funding won't keep pace
with demand. In response,
the Senate budget's 10
year expansion targets
anticipated need by fund
ing 2 /XX) additional schol
arships annually. As a
result, the Program could
serve 33,750 low-income
children through nearly
$145 million in funding by
2027-28.
Yet opposition persists.
Opponents argue expan
sion will harm public
schools. This is untrue.
The Senate budget rightly
addresses the primary role
of public schools in edu
cating students and pro
vides historic pay increases
for teachers. Even more
critical resources should be
directed to public schools
in coming years. Public
schools educate nearly 1.5
million of K-12 students
statewide, including my
two daughters. Still, I
believe this: The impor
tance of public schools'
role in education doesn't
negate the need for com
plementary options.
Some say the benefici
aries of Opportunity
Scholarships poor children
are better served solely by
public schools. The evi
dence indicates otherwise.
Just 42 percent erf econom
ically disadvantaged chil
dren attending our public
schools are proficient on
state end-of-grade tests.
Almost all schools earning
an "F' on state report cards
are high-poverty schools.
How do low-income fami
lies feel about these odds?
Of those fortunate enough
to receive an Opportunity
Scholarship,. 90 percent
choose to renew.
Opponents also stoke
fear, about "unaccount
able" private schools,
implying uniformity
through state tests alone
ensures a system of good
schools. Paradoxically, the
school leaders who raise
this argument to fault the
Opportunity Scholarship
Program pressure our State
to modify or remove some
of these same accountabili
ty standards for public
schools.
Certainly outside met
rics are necessary, and pri
vate schools participating
in the scholarship program
must adhere to testing and
reporting requirements.
However, their require
ments are not the same as
those of traditional public
schools, nor should they
be. Spurious logic about
uniformity has also been
used, almost verbatim, to
argue against public char
ter schools. Yet tens of
thousands of students pop
ulate charter school wait
lists, and many school dis
tricts are now advocating
for a more charter-like
approach less regulation,
more creativity in curricu
lar determinations, and
greater flexibility regard
ing teacher certification
standards.
We must face reality:
our K-12 system does not
educate poor, mostly
minority, students well.
Could it be that the 400
plus private schools partic
ipating in the Opportunity
Scholarship program
might have something to
teach students and us about
innovative approaches to
educating poor children?
Thousands of low
income families, for whom
doors of opportunity have
already opened, surely
think so. But outside,
more, like La Toy a Allen
of Charlotte, are waiting.
"I want to do all I can so
that [my son] won't
become another statistic,"
she says.
For him and many oth
ers, doors of opportunity
needn't be half-closed.
Now is the time for North
Carolina to open wide the
door of opportunity.
Darrell Allison is the
president of Parents for
Educational Freedom in
North Carolina.
It's not just Donald Trump:
The media is out
of control
I sat last
Mildred night [June 6]
and watched
Robertson in disbelief as
MSNBC and
Guest othfr "ews
_ . , outlets disen
Columnist franchised
??? millions of
voters by
announcing Hillary Clinton as the pre
sumptive nominee for the Democratic
Presidential Party. This election season
has given pause to thinking Americans.
The system is broken. We must do some
thing to bring this democracy back into
balance. >
Don't get me wrong. I am a Hillary
I
supporter. I was pretty sure
she was going to win. Those
who had been doing the math -
expected this as the final out
come. But to call it before mil
lions have even had the oppor
tunity to cast their vote is a
total overreach on the part of
the media.
This last turn of events is
only one in a long list of per
versions 'to the election
process that, I believe, is
fueled by' the media and
threatens our very freedom.
First there was the 11-ring cir
cus that was the Republican
primary where the multiplici
ty of voices gave rise to the
carnival barker that is Donald
Tmmp.
Had the Republicans been
able to field an array of quali
fied candidates who intelli
gently debated the serious
issues that face our country,
we might have gotten a serious presiden
tial contender that offered a realistic alter
native to the Democratic nominee.
Instead, we got a presidential primary
reality series orchestrated by a television
personality whose arrogance is superseded
only by his proclivity to lie and misrepre
sent both himself and his opponents. This
was facilitated by the media who used the
entertainment value of a Donald Trump
candidacy to boost ratings, with little
thought given to the impact of this free
coverage on the democratic process. No
other candidate could have afforded to buy
the time that was freely given to Trump to
pspouse his stupidity, hatred, bigotry aftd
racism, which, unfortunately, were
embraced by millions of Republicans!
For ratings; the media allowed Trump
to suck up all the air in the room, leaving
no space for thoughtful, meaningful
debate. Each news day has been dominat
ed by his most recent outrageous antics,
with few media questioning either the
veracity or the news worthiness of his
statements. Now, in the 11th hour, some
media have stepped up to challenge
Trump, but it is too little, too late.
And then there is the Democratic
Primary. Neither Bernie nor Hillary has
gotten much attention, until now. Oh, there
was momentary coverage when someone
attacked Hillary for this, that or the other.
Bernie got some airtime when he claimed
unfairness in the Democratic Party pri
mary process, but for the most part, neither
has received much media play as it relates
to their basic platform.
For the media, it is all about personali
ty and perception, seldom about substance.
If it is not about Benghazi, emails or Bill,
if it doesn't involve raging against the sys
tem or millennials who are disenchanted
with the status quo, then it's just not going
to get airtime. Media coverage has
focused on what separates us, what vexes
us rather than issues that will impact our
future and determine our path in a world
facing mahy serious challenges.
Our nation must address issues associ
ated with global warming, nuclear threats,
social unrest, aging seniors, childcare,
equality for women, minorities and others
outside social norms. We have no time for
"must see TV."
The freedoms given the media were
provided to ensure the free exchange of
ideas, a fundamental tenet of a free society.
As one trained as a journalist, I understand
the sacred nature of this provision in our
Constitution. But what the modern day
media has done with the freedoms afford
.ed it by our Constitution is nothing short of
sacrilegious.
I certainly fear government intrusion
into the inner workings of the media. But
somehow, someone must determine what
is true journalism and what is entertain
ment. It is, I believe, unethical for the
media to cause millions of Americans to
feel that their votes are irrelevant. When
ratings become more important than
democracy, when being the first to break a
story is more important than the impact
that breaking news will have on millions
of Americans, it appears to me that the
media have fallen short of the lofty expec
tations of our Founding Fathers.
Could this announcement not have
waited until the polls closed today [June
7]? Of course it could, but not if you want
ed to be first.
It is my prayer that those states casting
their ballots [on June 7 were not] deterred
by media whose desire for ratings is the
sum total of what they have become, I
hope that voters cast their ballots despite
the unethical ratings hungry behavior of
some media. Every vote counts, regardless
of what the media says. It must for our
democracy to stand.
Mildred Robertson of Raleigh is an
independent public relations professional
with more than 30 years in the industry.
She has worked with several historically
black colleges and universities. She also
served as a public relations professional
with the Alliance of North Carolina Black
Elected Officials organization for 10
years.
;XrtuJ|ork
m/mtrn
EsP^
IHJ.IIUIiuJI.IILIII