Although she was a candidate for the GOP nomination for this seat two years ago, this is the first video I’ve posted of Ms. Few — in fact, I don’t think I shot pictures of her either, since I didn’t post any at the time. She was the second candidate to come in for an interview in 2006, and it apparently had not yet dawned on me to take my camera into those meetings for blog purposes.
This time around, I have an embarrassment of riches — so many images and clips on candidates that they keep threatening to crash my laptop. And yet, they’ve been coming in so fast I haven’t had time to post many on the blog. But at least I’m doing this one. (Truth be told, if I weren’t under the gun to produce a video clip of something for the Saturday Opinion Extra by midnight, I wouldn’t be doing this one, either — it’s been a tough week, and hours to go before I sleep.)
In this clip, Ms. Few is talking about her proven ability to raise money, which she suggests (and she’s probably right) is considerably greater than that of her two opponents, David Herndon and Tony Lamm.
Up to now, contributions to her campaigns has been a source of controversy, since she attracts a considerable amount from out-of-state sources pushing private school "choice." But she says Republicans should consider that the party is in danger of losing the seat currently held by Bill Cotty, and that the likely Democratic nominee — Anton Gunn, who played a key role in the Barack Obama campaign in South Carolina — might be able to raise some out-of-state money of his own.
Here’s the clip:
Related Posts
Run and hide from this candidate. Conservative doesn’t even scratch the surface.
God forbid private school “choice” actually force public schools to impart knowledge rather than just stack bricks and mortar together to provide a sturdy home for our shame.
Education gave way to appropriation long ago. Half a century of the great social experiment has bred a generation that values tolerance more than testing.
And still they cry for more money, more bricks and SMART boards.
I understand, PM, that you would have reasons to believe what you say. There are still those of us in education,however, who value knowledge and quality. I think I am one of them, and there are many more at my school like me. I’d like to think that every school in this state has many good, dedicated teachers in it.
Do we become frustrated as well? You bet. But that doesn’t stop us from doing what we can to try to teach each class they give us.
You are being too simplistic. The attitude I seem to detect in you is the same attitude that will eventually run me out of teaching. In fact, I heard a story the other day from another teacher in my district about a first-year teacher (and quite a good one) who is already dreading next school year…and we have two more weeks left in this one.
Oh, and you can have my smart board. I don’t want it. It gets in my way when I want to use my white board, but I HAVE to have it because the powers-that-be insist I have to have it.
It’s a vicious cycle. Many of you call for school choice, which in turn makes my district feel the need to turn to more technology to attract and keep students.
Who’s caught in the middle? Teachers who care, teachers who are discouraged, and students who don’t.
Please try to give a little more credit to the teachers who have educated masses of students and tried to give them the tools they need for the future.
Sorry. My frustration is showing. I don’t know what the answer is, but the nastiness against public schools is doing more harm than good.
Why don’t we ever see school teachers speaking up with detailed criticism of failed educational programs and suggestions for improving education?
When I wrote “education gave way to appropriation long ago,” I hoped people would infer that the target of my bluster is administration and legislation, not teachers.
Given several choices to achieve a goal, I believe the S.C. Department of Education and S.C. House and Senate, not to mention this school board and that school board, aim to spend as much money to achieve the goal as possible, in order to buy the votes of people who don’t have much money.
I think we could change our state’s educational tune best and cheapest by putting an emphasis such as never seen before on early childhood education.
But that wouldn’t throw so much money around, so we build middle schools and high schools that look like prisons and seem to occupy as much space as possible.
My district’s high school, all 60 acres of it, has a club for those who make 1,000 or better on the SAT. Each year, about 10 of the 150-200 people taking the SAT get in.
Imagine that. Only one in 15-20 students in my district make 1,000 on the SAT.
Sixty acres to mow minus parking lots and bricks doesn’t seem to be helping our academic lot much.
So now we’re building a new middle school to share that 60 acres, complete with a 2,500-seat competition gym that will never fill up, so no one will have to stand up or get wet at graduation.
And up at the district office, we have at least a dozen administrators doing the work of four or five people badly.
I’m sure there are some good teachers in the district. But looking past the shortcomings of the school board and district office to see the good teacher is not an easy thing to do.
When I wrote “education gave way to appropriation long ago,” I hoped people would infer that the target of my bluster is administration and legislation, not teachers.
Given several choices to achieve a goal, I believe the S.C. Department of Education and S.C. House and Senate, not to mention this school board and that school board, aim to spend as much money to achieve the goal as possible, in order to buy the votes of people who don’t have much money.
I think we could change our state’s educational tune best and cheapest by putting an emphasis such as never seen before on early childhood education.
But that wouldn’t throw so much money around, so we build middle schools and high schools that look like prisons and seem to occupy as much space as possible.
My district’s high school, all 60 acres of it, has a club for those who make 1,000 or better on the SAT. Each year, about 10 of the 150-200 people taking the SAT get in.
Imagine that. Only one in 15-20 students in my district make 1,000 on the SAT.
Sixty acres to mow minus parking lots and bricks doesn’t seem to be helping our academic lot much.
So now we’re building a new middle school to share that 60 acres, complete with a 2,500-seat competition gym that will never fill up, so no one will have to stand up or get wet at graduation.
And up at the district office, we have at least a dozen administrators doing the work of four or five people badly.
I’m sure there are some good teachers in the district. But looking past the shortcomings of the school board and district office to see the good teacher is not an easy thing to do.
Well, Lee, because we are expected to support what is going on. I’m pretty old-fashioned myself, and I really do understand what the perception of the public is.
One of the problems, it seems to me, is that the critics let the “stuff” get in the way of what is going on in the classroom. There really are a vast number of caring, hard-working teachers out there. Most of us just don’t blow our own horns, so to speak. This is a funny occupation because we are expected to stay out of the limelight. Mostly the news people read about teachers is negative.
It really hurts, too. I dread the news (and newspapers) sometimes because I dread bad stories about education.
PM, I understand your concern about the SAT. But I’d like to think that the SAT and ACT are just part of the way we judge students. Our district actually does quite well in our scores. And it does go in cycles.
Susan,
As long as teachers sit on their hands and keep their mouths shut, they will never be professionals. They are contract workers, year-by-year. If they offer suggestions which run counter to the current party line, they risk being sent to the district’s Outer Siberia HS, or just not being hired at all.
The teacher unions seem to be run by the administrators. They never speak up against any program that spends more money and creates more jobs (and union dues).