IB foes intent on misleading the public

For the past several months I've tried to ignore Mr. Duncan Koler and his personal vendetta against the Coeur d'Alene School District's IB program. My general approach to individuals with strongly held false beliefs is to ignore them - avoid adding fuel to their fires. It hasn't worked in this case. Mr. Koler continues to spread false information cloaked in out-of-context "facts" and seemingly feigned concern for protecting our hard-earned money (see Oct. 5 "Readers Write.")Mr. Koler has asked for more facts and less rhetoric about the IB program while simultaneously and hypocritically offering his opinion the IB program is a "waste of resources." The FACT of the matter is the IB program has been, and continues to be, an unqualified success. Anyone who desires confirmation of this need not look far. One column over from Mr. Koler's most recently published diatribe, a well-written editorial outlined direct and unambiguous feedback from college admission counselors that IB program involvement is highly regarded. Anybody doubting this contention need only contact the admissions office of any esteemed college or university to learn first-hand of the value and merits of this program. Information is also available closer to home. Review of recent college placements for Coeur d'Alene IB students should impress anyone truly interested in seeing evidence of the program's success.

I've struggled, without success, to understand Mr. Koler's true agenda behind his attacks on the IB program. One thing seems clear: it cannot truly be about money. He opines the IB program is wasting money - money that is needed to ensure "ALL our students are students are college-ready." This concern is either dishonest or highly questionable. Why, if he is so concerned our money should be directed at "ALL" our students, to make them "college-ready," has he neglected to attack the $9.5 million that taxpayers are funneling to development of the Kootenai Technical Education Campus? (Front page story, Oct. 5). The dollar amount directed toward that program dwarfs any sum ever directed toward the IB program. Money spent on that program will not benefit ANY college-bound student. Do not miss the point. The KTEC program should be considered a feather in the cap of our school district. Nevertheless, it amounts to a lot of money directed at a subset of students. Yet, not a peep from the self-proclaimed consumer advocate Mr. Koler.

The cost of the IB program is worth considering. Not only because it consumes a small but relevant amount of the school district's budget, but also because the potential elimination of the program could prove even more costly. Any competent business professional is well aware of the adage it takes money to make money. Companies that build better mousetraps, generally make more money. The value the IB program brings to the school district should be understood in light of this principle. IB students add a great deal to the learning environment in our schools.In addition, professionals and business owners considering relocating to this area tend to be very interested in the availability of advanced learning programs. If their gifted children cannot be accommodated in our public schools, rest assured, they will go elsewhere. A great deal will be lost with their departure (including a considerable sum of money).

I won't waste much time or space on the paranoid contention the IB program is intent on taking over our collective consciousness. I had hoped McCarthyism had run its sorry course in our nation's history. Apparently I was wrong.A statement of Mr. Koler's regarding the cost of the IB program needs to be addressed (for the intelligent, reasoned discussion Mr. Koler says he desires.) Mr. Koler has stated the district "shells out" $77,000 per IB diplomat. This statement appears to be purposely misleading. What is true is most IB students do not earn the IB diploma necessary to be considered a diplomat. This does not mean these IB students have wasted his/our money. Making such an implication is akin to stating any athlete who does not earn a state championship has wasted money directed at school athletics. Dividing the sum of money delegated to the IB program by those who earn the certificate is an example of lying by statistics.

One final bothersome tactic used by Mr. Koler in his curious attack on the IB program includes his tendency to wage an "either-or" competition between the IB and the AP programs. This tactic is both misguided and inappropriate. Simply stated, the two programs serve different purposes. Arguing for the demise of the IB program by comparing it to the AP program is comparable to proposing that high-school football should be eliminated because the tennis program is less costly. True, but unrelated.

Eric Heidenreich, MD, is a Kootenai County resident.