Florez talks often about the need for organizations to renew or repair themselves, particularly education. The fact is, organizations don't renew themselves unless forced to by competition. How does education repair itself without real competition? That's what I'd like to know.

It's time for Mr. Florez to stop whining and actually propose some worthwhile reform. I have been reading his column for some time, and it becomes more apparent with each op ed on education that he is content to act as a time teller.

We don't need more people telling the time (i.e., that education needs broad reform not just little nips and tucks here and there). We need people of influence to actually offer up real lasting solutions, which right now may not be broadly popular.

Anyone with a pen can be a critic. Sticking your neck out and putting before the public real solutions takes courage that Mr. Florez seems unwilling to exert.

Dividing districts to a community level makes it possible to do what John is talking about, namely looking at what do we really want from our educational system. Why? because each community is different and each community needs to go through that exersize of discussing what is most important and what is worth the cost, the very questions John brings up. That ongoing discussion builds parents and ultimately builds students.

Creating community districts, who compete against each other, is the only "real" competition on an even playing field possible. Vouchers won't do that.

Will dividing into community districts immediately solve everything? No, but it is the only way to begin to solve the problems. That is why it is the MOST important single thing we can do to improve education. The problems are solvable, but only at the community level.

Amen to Lyall's observation. Mr. Florez constantly berates public education with claims of "failure," "frustrated parents," "faltering schools," with no quantification of his fellow whiners nor examination of the true source of their angst.

Mr. Florez, you can point fingers and name-call until the sun goes down, but what public education needs is, first, a plan to address the needs of a wide range of child demographics and disabilities and second, a substatial amount of new on-going money to provide the skills and people to make it work.

Behind all of this are two kinds of parents: those who can't or don't care to discipline their child's education, and those who are frustrated that THEIR children must attend a system that is forced to play parent to so many neglected students.

It's a societal problem, John. Put your pen in your pocket and do something constructive to help the state fix it.

I find Mr. Cox's comments offensive, as should other citizens, white, brown, black, or other. He now seems to confirm what has previously been only an accusation: that the separationists want their own community and their own schools, untainted by people of color.

I agree that the only way our education problem is going to be solved is at the local level.

That State Board of Education approved new math standards last week. It was a dismal failure that will only muddy the math problem in the state.

If every parent were to get their child tested right now for what math level they are performing on compared to children in the other industrialized nations there would be a revolution in this state. The new math standards was a step forward, but not near what the legislature asked for.

Dittos to both Lew and Lyall.

Taken a step further; The problem with Florez's platitudes is they fail to recognize reality. The precise problem is that there is NO consensus on what education should be or look like. You might as well look for consensus on what religion should provide. There is a very good reason we have so many different churches. Education is such an integral part in raising and rearing children to maturity there will never be consensus on what it should offer, when, or how. What one parent considers essential, another will consider immoral, destructive, or even false.

Take hot button issues like how and when (or even whether) sex ed should be handled or how evolution should be treated and it is clear that one could study and debate 'till the children were drawing their pensions and there would be no agreement. Even on issues not normally considered religious or moral there is no agreement.

Traditional or "discovery" math ala the Alpine school district. Should history present the U.S. as benevolent savior of the world during WWII and the cold war or as an imperialistic monster? Was FDR a man of great character and courage or someone who lied to the american people about his health and his willingness to let the soviets take over eastern europe? Should civics present an original intent view of constitutional law or a "living document" shaped by judicial opinion? Are the fine arts an essential component to education, or just a nice extra curricular? Should women and racial minorities be given equal space in the pages of history as the white males who made decisions?

Fundamentally, should education take an industrial approach of training workers or should it take a renaissance approach of imparting knowledge, morals, and wisdom for the sake of creating a better person?

There is no right or wrong answer to these questions. Only many varied personal opinions about how to raise children.

Competition is needed in education not only to provide impetus for improvements but also to cater to these varied opinions while avoiding needless conflicts. I get along fine with my neighbors despite many personal, religious, and other differences in how we live our lives because our choices don't affect each other too much. So long as we all keep up our yards and keep the noise down after dark we get along fine. I pray to my god and drive my choice of cars, buy my kids the clothes of which I approve and engage in the weekend recreation we enjoy while my neighbors make very different choices.

But force us to send our children to the same school for 8 hours a day simply because we live near each other and there will be conflicts just as if you said we all had to attend the same church or our choices of recreation and transportation would be made by popular vote rather than individual choice.

David Cox is right that smaller districts will help in this regard. He is wrong in suggesting that vouchers won't.

EVERY child deserves a good education. The State constitution requires the taxpayers to FUND that education. It does NOT require the State to run a single, monopoly school for every child or even 95% of all children. We have a wonderful higher ed system with vouchers (pell grants, GI bill money, student loans) available to the student regardless of which school he attends, government or private, secular or religious. The same system would do wonders at our primary and secondary schools.

Let parents decide what kind of education their children should receive WITHOUT being subject to political or majority vote of geographic neighbors. Every minute spent fighting over what a one-size-fits-all government school should or should not teach is a minute NOT spent actually teaching a child. Let the money follow the child and empower parents to decide for themselves (but not for others) what constitutes a proper education.

Ah yes, Teha Rangi, raise the race card. If you disagree with someone call them a racist. Perhaps you think that South Salt Lake, part of the proposed new district, don't have "people of color"?

The fact is smaller districts help close the gap for minorities and lower socio-economic kids. See www.smallerschools.org. The rich, white kids are not hurt near as much by the big districts as the rest are.

Frankly, I'm sick of comments such as "failing schools", "forced competition", "vouchers", "parent choice", and "smaller school districts". Citizens, policy makers, and parents simply need to get their rears into their own neighborhood schools (for more than a photo-op) and start there to see what needs to happen in education. Despite the odd horror story here and there,teachers and parents are actually on the same side. How about starting at that level?

I'm also sick of hearing about our failing schools, especially when I read the literature that shows the United States is at the bottom of industrialized nations when it comes to math. I'm tired of students who come college unprepared to take college algebra. I'm tired of school district administrators blowing off parents who ask for something better.

QOTU, it is interesting that such a large number of parents are doing just what you suggest. They getting involved with teachers by creating charter schools where teachers and parents working together.

In the final analysis public education is about taking the ideals we all want for education and implementing them in the real, sometimes very messy, world. Policy makers are put into office by the voter and they are responsible for finding a balance that best serves the needs of children. Sometimes the needs of individuals are and can be met and sometimes the needs have to be geared to larger groups hoping to benefit as many children as possible. What is needed most now is old fashioned civil discourse without underlying agendas. We have deterioratated in our discourse as adults and yet expect our children to somehow do better. I find it interesting that every comment added here has been geared to individual pet projects or concerns. We have deteriorated to the point where our best hope lies in taking a metaphorical step back and finding those areas where we can agree, where we are suceeding and building on those areas of success. One prime example is the K-3 reading program that has been haled by parents, teachers and administrators as a postive program that honestly helps the individual child. We need to quit the political games of I'll support your cause if you support mine. But we must begin by acknowledging the great good that public education has and can continue to do in the future, but only if we as a society work together towards those educational ideals.