How is PSJA’s charter proposal affording equal opportunities?
Section 1.002 of the Texas Education Code states in part that, “…the educational institution shall provide equal opportunities to all individuals within its jurisdiction…” Therefore, I have a question. Why does PSJA Superintendent Daniel King wish to give some of their campuses special “charter schoollike qualities?”
How does this insure “equal opportunity?” How does involving an outside contractor (IMO) improve the quality of education? How does allowing these IMOs increased autonomy preserve “equal opportunities?”
In fact, SB 1882 allows that these charter campuses may be temporarily or permanently, by repeated application, exempt from performance standards.
Further reading indicates that these schools are wholly under the control of a board appointed by the IMOs. Hold on, doesn’t this whole charade begin to sound like the hospital district? Wake up, OWLS!
In these times where our politicians in Austin are trying to revise history
books and starve local districts into accepting money controlled by the feds or appointed boards, we should be very suspicious about any carrot we see dangling in front of our noses.
Of course, any information increasing my understanding of this educational end run would be appreciated.
Ned Sheats, Mission
‘Enough’ competing for US attention
Too bad that the United States will only talk seriously and offer assistance with nuclear nations — what a lesson!
If you have bombs of massive destruction, such as Russia, China, North Korea and perhaps some day Iran, then the U.S. might speak with you.
So force and the image of destruction get a response, while underdevelopment of big-time weapons stands for little.
Want attention from the U.S., build or buy a nuclear bomb or threaten to develop one!
It is no wonder that the U.S. has paid scant attention to the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Sudan and South Sudan,
Yemen, even Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan, and Mexico’s 150,000 — at least — deaths the past decade.
Wars rages in some, with the U.S. often involved, directly or indirectly, but these conflicts do not receive the same urgent focus as nuclear matters.
Get busy developing nuclear reactors, you neglected lands — and there are more on the list — in need of health, water and reproductive assistance, and maybe then you will get the attention of the U.S.!
Bad implications with this global reflection.
Consider guns in the U.S. — attention they grab — not the reasons they are carried, used.
Dialogue — so distant worldwide, so distant in Texas and the United States.
Where are the leaders who will reverse this madness?
Where?
Or, will citizens finally scream, “Enough!”
Eugene ‘Gene’ Novogrodsky, Brownsville
