Readers Write: How kids actually learn

Opinion editor's note: Star Tribune Opinion publishes letters from readers online and in print each day. To contribute, click here.

•••

In response to "Trust parents, transform Minnesota schools" by John C. "Chuck" Chalberg (Opinion Exchange, Oct. 22): I'm a public school educator and a member of the teacher's union, and while I'm content with my local union, I hold negative views on Education Minnesota. I consider myself pro-school choice.

Amid the ongoing discussions about public education in Minnesota, what often goes unnoticed is a parallel story that has unfolded alongside the decline in academic achievement among Minnesota students and the increasing prevalence of culture-war issues within our public schools.

This parallel story revolves around the widespread adoption of ineffective instructional methods that began about a decade or two ago and are now fully entrenched in our education system in the state. These ineffective methods include balanced literacy (a topic that Emily Hanford has covered extensively in her podcast "Sold a Story"), an overemphasis on inquiry learning (which coincidentally is the framework applied to the draft revision Minnesota K-12 Academic Standards in Social Studies), and the dilution of gifted-and-talented educational options.

These changes have not only affected traditional public schools but have also made their way into many charter schools, particularly those that do not follow the classical model, as well as some private schools in Minnesota.

Though I consider myself an advocate for parental choice, it's important to recognize that not all charters and private schools necessarily offer a superior alternative to the local public school district. Some may provide better educational opportunities, while others may not. Therefore, if you're a parent or caregiver contemplating options other than your local school district, it's crucial to thoroughly examine the instructional practices of the schools you're considering. We all share a responsibility to be informed about these issues and advocate for effective instruction within all our schools.

Rachael Bauleke, Minnetonka

•••

Chalberg states in his opinion piece that school vouchers would improve Minnesota schools. Only when private schools accept all students and are held accountable for learning by publishing student scores on standardized tests, like public schools, would I consider using tax dollars for private schools.

Susan Sackrison, St. Louis Park

The writer is a retired teacher.

Chalberg poses the question about schools, "Is it really a case of book burners, racists and Christian nationalists on the march?" If I may be blunt, the answer is yes. The subjects of so many adults screaming at school boards have become familiar: "critical race theory," "pornographic" books, sexual "grooming" of minors and opposition to any concept of diversity in the wider world. Some of those screaming adults are now running for seats on boards around the metro that they targeted. These proponents of so-called parents' rights — whom we're supposed to trust — want only their rights to be imposed on all families.

As for school choice and the myth of creating opportunities for underserved students, readers would do well to revisit its origins in America as "segregation academies" formed after the 1954 Brown v. Board of Education decision. During the 2022-2023 school year, 74% of students in the Wisconsin voucher program never attended a public school. In New Hampshire it was 73%. In Indiana during the 2021-2022 year, less than 10% of students in the voucher program spent at least two semesters in a public school. For the first year of Arkansas' new program, 95% of students receiving vouchers did not attend a public school last year.

School choice is not about empowering parents — it is about empowering religious institutions and turning a foundation of American democracy into another for-profit enterprise.