TOP 10 NEWS STORIES OF 2002
Online Media
National/World News

CNN.com polled more than 5,000 Americans this month, asking for their picks as the Top Ten News Stories of 2002. The mounting crisis in Iraq topped the list, followed closely by the DC-area sniper case. Political races, including the 2002 midterm election shake up, failed to make the top ten. CNN.com released the following results:

Rank According to Poll (5,647 Total Votes)
#1 Tensions rise over standoff with Iraq
#2 Sniper attacks paralyze D.C. suburbs
#3 Palace scandals cause British royalty crisis
#4 Job cuts, consumer uncertainty plague U.S. economy
#5 Corporate America rocked by business scandals
#6 Catholic Church shaken by sex scandals
#7 Martha Stewart investigated for corporate fraud
#8 Afghanistan begins rebuilding as hunt for al Qaeda goes on
#9 Department of Homeland Security created
#10 Actress Winona Ryder convicted for shoplifting

(C) Copyright CNN, 2002

---

This story was compiled by the editor. CNN.com contributed the data for this report.

Even though we may have differing opinions on the shape of our public education system, few will disagree that it is in our children's and our nation's best interest that we continually try to improve our public schools. Interesting innovations in teaching children, and interesting ideas in school structure have led to dramatic increases in test scores, school attendance and skills and employability of graduates. But for any of these ideas to work, we must be willing to think creatively, and not dwell on obsolete visions of what our schools should look like.

Over the last few years, public education has become a prime issue in the political debates between the differing factions. On one side we have had the group that wants our government to completely rid itself of any oversight or accountability in our schools. Another group wants to use public tax money to pay for vouchers that follow the student and help pay for private education. Still another group wants to use tax money to fund charter schools. Then of course you have those who vehemently defend public schools and will fight all these ideas. This constant battle between these groups has left the voters heads spinning and prevented all of us from working together to improve our schools.

Before we look at any of these ideas I believe it is important for us to look at how our schools were envisioned in our state constitution and what we can and cannot do under those constitutional boundaries. The authors of the Washington State Constitution believed that "Public Education is the paramount duty of the State of Washington," and that a well-educated public was required to ensure a strong democracy. Article 9 also further puts strict restrictions and requirements on when and how "Common School Funds" can be used. Many articles have been written on this subject with varying opinions on how this should be interpreted and what can and cannot be done with our public schools. According to some strict opinions of Article 9 Section 2 and Section 4 ideas such as School Vouchers and even Charter Schools may or may not be legal. Most assuredly they would face a long court battle spending more of the precious resources that should be focused on our children, these resources being time and money.

So how do we move forward in improving the education of our children? I believe we must stop becoming defensive when we talk about changing our school systems. Few if any in this nation would like to see the public school system fail. If our schools were to fail we would see large increases in crime, poverty, and worse of all ignorance. We know that no matter what the cost of education, it is far less expensive than the alternatives. But we do want to see our schools accountable. The way we hold our schools accountable is where most of our differences lie.

Restructuring our public school system has been the subject of many studies and many debates over many years. In order for the system to change, parents and most importantly students must have choices. Students should no longer be assigned to a particular school, and schools should no longer be organized as a monopoly public bureau under strict political control. This withdrawing of the exclusive franchise for public education is what scares some of the people. They look at our schools in essentially ideologic terms and do not want to look into the system for causes of the troubles we have faced. For them, it is simply enough to say that "Market" and "Choice" violate the theory of public education and are not interested in practical discussion of what might help. There is however a growing movement in this country to look at new ideas such as choice and competition and there relation to public schools. There is a growing willingness to look at new ideas -- however uncomfortable they may be to educators -- to see if they might work.

As we talk about issues such as school choice it is important that we look at the fact that choice exists today. Kids are free to go to any school, anywhere -- public or private -- if their parents can pay the cost of tuition or the cost of moving their place of residence. This program is currently in place and many people make those choices. The problem is it is very inequitable: it discriminates against the poor. A family with lots of money has lots of choice; a family with little money has little choice. This inequity is what we need to address.

But choice alone is not enough; as long as there is no reason for traditional schools to improve it is unlikely they will make the changes needed to improve the system. It is this reason that we need to remove the exclusive franchise. We need to allow a new type of school as part of our public education system.

What shape might these new schools take? People both inside and outside of public education tend to share the conviction that new schools should have some of the characteristics of private schools-the autonomy, smaller class size, the freedom to innovate-along with appropriate accountability for the public resources they receive. Now how do we translate this into workable specifics?

Currently in the State of Washington, Educational Service Districts provide services to school districts and in some cases provide educational services directly to students. If we were to establish hybrid type schools that combined characteristic of Private schools, Charter type schools, and public schools and operated them inside the ESD system we could provide choice, competition and accountability of funds. We could adapt a particular school directly to the needs of a community, and most importantly adept education directly to the needs of a child. It also provides incentives for traditional public school districts to improve their services, as they no longer have "the only game in town."

In a small agricultural town such as Garfield you might have a hybrid school that dealt with the particular needs of a farming community. It might have more flexible hours, more focus on agricultural technology and a less rigid structure. In Lakewood, you might have a school that provided a different type of classroom for Korean students. In lower test score areas you might have a school that provided more one on one education. The key is adaptability. These schools would still have the same requirements of open admissions, standards of education, and accountability, but they would have more autonomy at the local school level. Although they would not necessarily be accountable to the local school board, they would be public schools operating under the SPI's office and under the laws of the State of Washington. But most importantly the parents, students and teachers could adapt the classroom to the particular need of the student and of the community.

As we move into the 21st century our students and our schools are going to need to change to meet new needs. Rather than looking at the competition of Hybrid schools being a threat to public education, we need to look at the many ways it will be a benefit. By providing choice, they offer incentive for all schools to be the best they can possibly be. By providing adaptability they can better deal with student populations that a traditional school might have not have the resources for. It will not take from public education, it will add to it. It will allow us to be more confident that every child can get the best possible education, and every child can graduate ready to compete in today's new world.

---

Rich is a long time Political and Labor Activist, and currently is a City Council member in a small town in South King County.

---