I thought we got rid of "Parents for Choice in Education" when we killed the pro-voucher movement last year.

I think that there is a definite need for finding the educational environment in which a student can thrive and experience the most success, but having that window open all year can be problematic. It has been my experience that a mid-year move can have serious negative effects on a student if not done carefully and for the right reasons. If the move is to get away from the negative effects of a child's chosen friends, the new school is sure to have similar students- who will monitor this? Even if a school has extra "capacity as defined by each school district's average class size," this does not guarantee that there is room in a particular class or program that the child needs. If a school is then forced to take another student in this scenario, it is not fair to any students. Remember- the single most important factor in determining the success of a student is and always has been the amount of time and interest provided by the child's parents.

A big thank you to the parents that continued to push this through. If you've ever had the unpleasant experience of trying to attend an out-of-area school, especially in the Alpine School District, I'm sure you can relate. I'm sure there are a few schools where the enrollment is huge but most schools are not and even Oak Canyon Jr. which claims to be "at capacity" every year has plenty of move-outs and space. I am anxiously looking forward to those statistics being published online. If a parent is the the single most important factor in determining the success of a student then the parent's time and opinions should have very serious consideration.

Unfortunately a parent can be the single most important and detrimental factor to a student's success. Parents who move around, neglect their student, or even wealthy parents who enable their child create educational nightmares. Each of these parents will be further enabled with this law. One such parent recently attempted to enroll in out of district school. Luckily for the school, the new administrator remembered the student and the parent from an earlier grade. This student wasn't allowed to enroll. I worry that this law may force schools to admit chronically problematic parents and students.

It seems that "30 year teacher" is putting the needs of the system and its programs ahead of the needs of the families and students that the system is supposed to serve.

And of course parents have the most influence, but I hear it used by defenders of the status quo as a catch-all excuse for any failures in the system. If the schools have no effect on student performance beyond a parent's involvement, then why are we spending billions of dollars a year on a lost cause??

The whole reason we ever started publicly funding and running schools was to help the disadvantaged, so if the schools can't help them, why waste taxpayer money?

The truth is, teachers matter. Parents matter. School systems matter. The legislature can't legislate better parents. It can legislate a better education system that puts children first.

Right Dave. These are not our kids. Parents should have more rights when it comes to their childrens education.
I have been there. My kids were not allowed to attend another school because we were not in that district. So the anti white predjudice prompted us to do the homeschool thing for many years. It seems to me doing that which is best for the child should always be considered first. That is why we educate children, isn't it? To benafit them?

While I appreciate the transparency that this bill offers, I do see the potential for problems. Troublemakers are going to be able to influence many schools during the course of the year rather than one. I hope Districts will be allowed to exclude accepting currently suspended students until at least after the suspension is complete. But with this law, it enables these types of kids to avoid consequence.