School Vouchers

[kappaloo]

Originally posted by Pike1483
some good points by everyone. What about this-- if there are no vouchers and parents choose to send their kids to private schools, I don't think those parents should have to pay the taxes for the public schools.

But then.... why should people without children be forced to pay taxes on public schools?

[Rudey]

Originally posted by kappaloo
But then.... why should people without children be forced to pay taxes on public schools?

Because an uneducated citizen is the shame of the entire country.

It is this uneducated citizen that leads hate rallies.

It is this uneducated citizen that falls into a life of crime that society then spends money to jail instead of spending money to educate.

It is this uneducated citizen that shoots an innocent 5 year old boy on the street in a drive by.

It is this uneducated citizen that doesn't understand his health. He can spread disease quickly to others.

It is this uneducated citizen that hurts his children - children who deserve better and keeps a cycle of going on and on.

-Rudey

[kappaloo]

Originally posted by Rudey
Because an uneducated citizen is the shame of the entire country.

It is this uneducated citizen that leads hate rallies.

It is this uneducated citizen that falls into a life of crime that society then spends money to jail instead of spending money to educate.

It is this uneducated citizen that shoots an innocent 5 year old boy on the street in a drive by.

-Rudey

Sure. But then EVERYONE should have to pay in. If the tax payer pays for public education, then everyone should pay. Taxes should not be discriminatory.

[Rudey]

Originally posted by kappaloo
Sure. But then EVERYONE should have to pay in. If the tax payer pays for public education, then everyone should pay. Taxes should not be discriminatory.

If the tax payer pays? Who isn't a tax payer? Who is everybody?

-Rudey

[PhiPsiRuss]

With the election, I forgot about this thread.

Originally posted by Rudey
Oh shit you went to Tech?

And I don't think a private school is definitely a better experience than Tech was. In fact if I had to bet, I'd say Tech would beat most private schools. I had the opportunity to take 11 college classes, take classes at Columbia university, work on 2 large research projects with several universities all through Tech.

-Rudey

The problem with a school like Brooklyn Tech (and Bronx Science and Stuyvesant) is the way that the faculty and administration is assembled. The principles and assistant principles at these schools are not chosen on merit. They're chosen based on political connections. Its well known among NYC teachers that those who are well connected with the Union will use their leverage to spend their remaining years, before retirement, at a cushy assignment like Tech. So you wind up with a school leadership that is not highly motivated, nor necessarily the best qualified.

The teachers, to a lesser extent also represent good political connections, but there are some very good teachers at these schools. There also teachers at these schools that simply don't belong there.

What made Tech great was the quality of the student body, and a time proven curriculum that was very rigerous. If you put a bunch of really smart kids together, you're probably going to get a school culture that reflects this.

[PhiPsiRuss]

Originally posted by Munchkin03
Why can't the public schools in poor neighborhoods be fixed? Some cities have had a good experience in turning some inner-city schools into magnets.

Also, students at all public schools are not "suffering." If that was true, my high school's graduation rate from college would not be what it was. That might be true for some NYC schools. There are also some private schools that I would not send my child to at all.

Some people will choose to go to the school that's closer than their homes, or where their parents went--regardless of educational quality.

We now have decades of hundreds (if not thousands) of dysfunctional school districts. As time has gone by, more money has been spent on these districts. The track record of turning these around is poor. Can these schools be turned around? In theory, yes. In reality, you probably have less than a 1% chance of being able to do this, and sustain the success for at least 5 years.

I don't count changing a dysfunctional school into a successful magnet school as part of the solution. This is just replacing everything, including the student body. What happens to the students that used to go to that magnet school? They're just shifted to someplace else.

The issue with successful public schools is somewhat specious because they reflect choice. These are schools where the parents have the means to choose where to live.

School choice is often, demagogically, painted as a way to transfer money to people who don't need it. It is an issue about empowering parents who have no choice. This is about parents and children who can't pick up and move to a quality public school when the need to do so is clear. Its about tearing down bueracracies and making the primary and secondary schools allocate their funds responsibly.

In NYC, public schools spend about $12,000 per child per year. Less than half of that makes its way to the classroom. This is a disgrace. The solution is not to spend more money. $12,000 is a lot. The solution is to replace a Soviet style command-and-control educational system with an American style market based system.

For the sake of those parents and children who are completely disempowered, I hope that this happens soon.

[tunatartare]

I went to Bronx Science and I think that it hurt us as much as it helped us. A lot of the teachers there were really unmotivated and couldn't care less about their students. While I had some absolutely great teachers who would bend over backwards to make sure that their students understood what was being taught and were interested in it, I also had some teachers where the classes were basically sink or swim. Because Bronx Science is a specialized high school, we ended up getting less funding than other public schools. For things like AP classes, where we got no funding at all, our Parent's Association had to pay for things like books. As a result, the school could only afford to have at most 45 or so kids in an AP class. When we applied to colleges, they would look at our transcripts and be impressed by the fact that we went to Bronx Science, but then they would wonder why we didn't take more AP's than we did. They just didn't understand that in a grade of 650 kids, about 340 of them met the criteria for taking AP's, but the school had room for only 40. Then, the colleges would get transcripts for kids from smaller schools or private schools or suburban public schools where there were more resources for kids to take AP's and be impressed by that. I remember when I first got to college, a lot of my friends were surprised that in high school we even had to apply for AP's.

[AEPhiSierra]

I went to Stuyvesant and the school is successful in spite of the board of ed not because of it. I actually almost got into an argument with a girl in my anthropology class that refused to believe Stuy got less money. In order to pay for all the great things stuy had we were constantly obsessed with fundraising. Our musicals and plays supported a lot of the student activities. Their was an annual phoneathon asking every parent in the school to give money. Last week I attended a gala that charged $250 - $1000 a plate raising money for the school. The fact is stuyvesant succeeds b/c the students and parents demand it.

I believe that if everyone demanded a quality education they would get one but they don't. We say we want better schools but no one really stands behind it on election day. One of my sisters is in her second year teaching at a NYC public school and she has all these rules about miniscule little things from how to sort her classroom library to what should be posted on bulletin boards. They think these reforms will make a difference but the only thing that will is more money and smaller classes. these teachers know what they are doing but how do you teach classes of 25-35 students most of whom are below grade level in reading. you simply can't give student the attention they need to succeed.

I have always been conflicted about vouchers especially since they often involve religous schools but you have to look at this from the side of desperate parents. It easy to say they should be spending the money on fixing the schools instead but is it really fair short change children in that environment until the gov't finally does fix things. While in theory there is school choice income dictates where people live and lower income areas have worse schools. In addition every year some students applying to new york city high schools (a proccess almost as complicated as applying to college) get rejected from all the high schools they apply to and often are placed in less desirable schools as a result.

I believe unless the govt can provide all students a proper education in the public schools they should be reqired to offer an alternative.

This whole discussion makes me think of a great quote: "It will be a great day when our schools get all the money they need and the air force has to hold a bake sale to buy a bomber."

[hoosier]

Originally posted by 33girl
The children don't know their neighbors. Their schoolmates are miles away.

The parents care nothing about supporting a neighborhood school because their children don't go there.

The children are given a very bad message that they are "superior" to the children in the school nearest to them - it's a Bad School that Mommy and Daddy said wasn't good enough for them.

Neighborhood schools bring neighborhoods together, vouchers tear them apart.

Did you - do you - support the bussing plans used to promote school intergration?

[hoosier]

Originally posted by Rudey
I think the teacher's union should be abolished as it is a corrupt and disgusting system that places the needs of awful teachers over those of students.

-Rudey

Amen.

Although if you had to work in the public schools, supervised by the jerks who often become principals, fearing a lawsuit anytime you do something, you would probably join the union too.

Many people join the teachers' union, because all members have a million dollar liability insurance coverage and the union has a staff of lawyers.

In many smaller systems, teachers/staff/bus drivers can be fired without cause, and the union protects these people.

[hoosier]

Originally posted by PhiPsiRuss
The principles and assistant principles

... that was very rigerous. If you put a bunch of really smart kids together, you're probably going to get a school culture that reflects this.

What are "assistant principles"?

Was your culture not "rigorous?"

Originally posted by hoosier
Amen.

Although if you had to work in the public schools, supervised by the jerks who often become principals, fearing a lawsuit anytime you do something, you would probably join the union too.

Many people join the teachers' union, because all members have a million dollar liability insurance coverage and the union has a staff of lawyers.

In many smaller systems, teachers/staff/bus drivers can be fired without cause, and the union protects these people.

Yea, I think teacher's unions are pretty hooterific, but being a brand new teacher this year and having the fear of God beat into me, with all the possible law suits, liability, bratty kids trying to ruin your life, etc.......the liability insurance seems like a huge plus. I talked to a rep from ATPE (association of Texas professional educators) and asked her, "if i join are you going to secretly send my dues to the john kerry campaign?" and she said that they weren't involved in politics unless it directly concerned teachers. Anyway, I'm not really decided on whether or not I'll join one. I know there are ones that are far more conservative than others, I think it's just a matter of finding the right one.

[hoosier]

Originally posted by PhiPsiRuss

In NYC, public schools spend about $12,000 per child per year. Less than half of that makes its way to the classroom. This is a disgrace. The solution is not to spend more money. $12,000 is a lot. The solution is to replace a Soviet style command-and-control educational system with an American style market based system.

If the teacher is paid $48,000 per year, that's the money for four kids. If there are 25 or 30 in the class, where is the other $252,000 to $312,000 going?

I support vouchers, if they are full-pay vouchers. Little Jonny's parents should be able to take his full $12,000 to a school of their choice. Offering a $3,000 voucher is a waste.

Each school would have a limit, so everyone can't choose the same school.

If XYZ school has 60 kids who leave, they have to fire two teachers, or (preferably) add some program that will attract 60 kids from other schools.

The capitalist for-profit system works in every other part of American life - surely it deserves a trial in education.

The USA govt. has been totally involved with three things: schools, post office, and VA hospitals. All three pretty much suck. Private schools, UPS/FedEx, and private hospitals are mucho superior.

[XOMichelle]

I don't think vouchers are the answer to the problem of poor public schools. If everyone was allowed to have a vouncher then everyone would leave, and the public school would only get worse. Private schools would become more crowded and have more money- only widening the gap between a public and private education. Resources should go into strengthening the communities and current public schools.

[Taualumna]

Originally posted by XOMichelle
I don't think vouchers are the answer to the problem of poor public schools. If everyone was allowed to have a vouncher then everyone would leave, and the public school would only get worse. Private schools would become more crowded and have more money- only widening the gap between a public and private education. Resources should go into strengthening the communities and current public schools.

But why would private schools become more crowded? They can choose not to admit kids if they want, even if it means more money. Some schools cap the number of students at a certain number. Several private schools here recently added new wings or buildings, but not every school is admiting more kids.