The liberal position is that public schools are great and all children should attend them. That there is no need for competition and, in fact, that competetion is a bad thing. There was much uproar when then DC voucher program was cancelled, but those currently recieving the vouchers. Now that Obama has decided to allow the program to continue for current students, what is his real message?
If public schools are just as good as the private ones, why make the compromise at all?
If the private schools are better than the public ones (as if there is any question), then why not expand the voucher program rather than cancelling it?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
27 comments:
Because the voucher program, as designed by conservatives, was meant as a back door means to funnel tax dollars into the church. Plain and simple.
I would be willing to bet that Obama's kids don't go to public school.
One may care to denigrate public schools but strange as it may seem there are actually quite a few people in this country that went through the public educational system and despite that function quite capably.
To make a fair comparison you would have to do the following.
Pick say, two high schools. One public and one private. Give them equal funding. Class size should be the same. As well as course curriculum. Demographics should be equal. The same number of students from upper, middle and lower class will make up the student body. Educational requirements for instructional staff and the attendant compensation, the same. Both schools must provide instructional materials, books, lab materials etc at no or little additional cost to the student. Breakfast and lunch must be provided at reduced or no cost to those unable to pay for them themselves. Transportation must be provided for any student more than two miles from campus. Conduct standards, I think you get the idea.
If under these circumstances the private high school could show itself to be a superior school to the public, measured by accepted aptitude and achievement tests then I'd say you have cause for doing away with public schools. Or at the very least granting free choice between public and private schools, both with public funding.
Sean, I think you miss the point of public education. You pay taxes for schools not to educate your own children but to educate the community's kids. You do this so at some point the community will have a viable work force. Think of it as an investment - one that everyone pays - whether they have children or not. Another example is when a high tech company such as Intel moves into a community. One of the first things they do is pump money into the local school system. They do this to ensure they will have an educated work force when they need it. I can assure you when a company considers locating to a new community the education system rates pretty high on the priority list. Without an educated work force there can be no industry. Lack of industry means a lack of revenue. Lack of revenue equals a lack of services. See the connection??
RAC - it is great to see that you've got the dem speaking points down "investment", indeed.
The DC school system has, I believe, the highest per student budget of the nation (something like 14K per year). Yet, they have the lowest results in test scores.
Meanwhile the voucher amounts were half that at around $7K per student per year, and the results are much, much better.
Dems don't support school choice because the teachers unions don't support school choice, because choice leads to competition which might lead to mass migration out of the public school system to private ones that actually produce results.
Oh, and another thing, most dem pols can't speak for more than 5 minutes without demonizing the "special interests". Of course, we're all supposed to believe the this term only applies to "big oil", "big drug", wall street, etc. Well, the teachers unions are certainly special interests, complete with forced contributions from their members and lobbyists.
All hail the change. All hail the dawn of a new era in Washington.
And, Doug, I won't take your bet.
Obama's girls go to Sidwell Friends - a very exclusive, private school. One which will shortly only educate the children of rich elites - once the vouchers run out - like, well, Obama's girls.
Sean, you are so on target once again!
Sean, care to explain why everyone pays for education? If it was not an investment in the community then only those with kids in school would foot the bill. The fact you want government to subsidize YOUR children's private education seems contrary to conservative principles. Could it be you have a hint of socialist in you?
When I talk about the "investment" I'm referring to the terms now in vogue by the Obama white house. We're not bailing out wall street, we're investing. We're not pouring money into left programs like smart grid and power from the grass, we're investing...
I don't anticipate being able to send my kids to any private schools. Rather, I'm talking about spending more and more and more and more confiscated funds on schools that often don't work. If it is actually cheaper for taxpayers to fund vouchers than to pay public school tuition, then why would you not favor that?
Contrary to having socialist streak, I actually think we have it all wrong. You shouldn't get a tax break when you have another kid, you should actually pay more taxes. After all, your new addition is consuming more government services.
Sean, I grin big every time you comment! :)
Sean, you actually make some good points. I'm all for the highest quality education we can get for our money. If you can improve the education system then you have my support. However, just as you don't want your tax dollars funding left leaning projects, I don't want mine funding church based education (especially at the expense of public schools). To do so violates the Constitution IMO.
There is nothing in the consitution granting the federal government any authority over education.
If you are against vouchers that might be used in catholic schools (not all private schools are church related in any case), then surely you must be fuming about all the tax dollars spent on political organizations like ACORN, right?
Sean - it is great to see that you've got the rep speaking points down "ACORN", indeed.
To my knowledge ACORN is not a church. There may be other issues with the money they receive but it is not a violation of the separation of church and state. Therefor, it is irrelevant to the conversation. But nice try though.
Hey I think we all went to public schools and look at us. Some of us even spent some time in private school. I went to Santa Barbara in Dededo for second grade and Saint Francis in Yona for fifth through eighth grade. Arent most Universities by definition private schools. You have to pay to attend. rac, being a private school doesn't make you a church based school. It did on Guam but not here. Just because government gives you a voucher doesn't mean they're "funneling" money to the church. Now thats a real stretch. I support public education for the very reasons you stated rac. Publicschools are way different now. The curriculum has really changed. When we came up it was reading,writing and arithmetic. Sean makes a great point that if you choose to send your kids to public schools then fine. But if you choose not to thats ok too. You should get a tax break or voucher because you are being less of a burden on the system. Thats a no brainer. When I went to catholic school you didn't have to attend morning mass or take religion class if your parents declined. There were alternatives. So theres no indoctrination. Hell the school doesn't care they just want the money. I had many classmates that were non-christian but their parents sent them there for the same reasons you are against. They didn't want their kids being brain washed by the american way of life and lose their cultural identities. See, it's a two way street. The perception being that private schools are stricter. They are. Thats why they mostly have uniforms. Not to discourage individuality but rather to reduce the distractions. We had dress down days where we could where whatever you wanted and yes the administrators had the final say on what was tastefull. Thats life brother. Every job I've ever had,had a dress code of some sort. And your parents didn't dare even think about suing the school district because they sent you home for wearing something different. See whats happened now. Schools are way different now. We have the lowest test scores in history. My grand son can't do simple math but he can write a book on why Obamas election is the greatest social achievement in our lifetimes. I don't think you believe any of this shit you're spewing you just won't agree with a conservative on anything. Thats the real problem with our country right now. You voted for change but only if that change was all left of center. If no one is ever going to agree on anything on either side then there will never be change. Just more of the same. Sad. peace out.
Separation of church and state? This is a rallying cry of the left, to be sure. It is a phrase Jefferson used in a letter, but there is no such phrase in the constitution or the bill or rights. The 1st amendment states that the "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof".
Making the leap between school vouchers and establishing a church is quite a feat.
There is no stretch when the state funds a church thru "school vouchers".
Private or public most school curriculum needs serious change. We really need to get our students competitive and competent in the sciences. We need the existing teachers competent to teach them. We need our leaders to agree to stop dumbing down Americans. I sent my kids to private schools with kids from all over the world. Most of the American kids were the ones struggling in the math,sciences and FL languages. I think in many cases the parents were the biggest handicap, totally focused on sending them to baseball camp for the summer rather then pushing their kids to the higher level classes. Not every kid is a Rocket scientist but we could defiantly do a better job to expose our kids to more than dinosaur shoebox dinoramas. My sons taught themselves programing languages in elementary and middle school because I made those materials available to them. Their teacher sucked at teaching higher level mathematics and physics, but they were able to find sites on the Internet to supplement instruction. My kids went to private schools because that is what is available for expats but I think I had better teachers in Pittsburgh. I think stateside parents who have kids in private schools might also be more supportive of making sure they get results for their dollars, here most companies pay for the kids tuition. Private schools tend to have less student to teacher ratios and overseas the tuition runs anywhere from 13-27 thousand dollars not including some one time registration fees that run into the thousands.
Juliet - I agree that the education of our children is sorely lacking. Having never been to a private school I don't really know much about them, but I have a suspicion that a large factor in the sucessfull education is the participation of the parent. I think many parents send their kids to public school and don't take an active role. "The school is free", after all. People tend to pay less attention when they aren't paying for something.
I'm sure that private schools have better success because they are competing for students and tuition dollars. Competition is always good. But, I suspect that the private school parents tend to take a more active role in part *because* they are paying tuition and want to get their money's worth.
Forbes just published their list of Top Towns to Live Well. The criteria for ranking included cultural amenities, pro-business environments, highly educated workforces and enviable salaries.
So should school vouchers also apply to homeschooling?
Here's what some in the Jewish community think about school vouchers.
Why Do Religious Leaders and Organizations
Oppose DC Vouchers?
State Supreme Court Flunks Voucher Subsidies For Religious And Other Private Schools
Christian schools and a strong home schooling movement are the foundations of dominionism. "Until the vast majority of Christians pull their children out of the public schools," writes Gary North, "there will be no possibility of creating a theocratic republic."
I know little about home schooling verses private schooling verses public schooling. But I can tell you that my daughter whom has been home schooled since finishing elementary school is maintaining a perfect 4.0 average in her freshman year of college. She started her freshman year at the age of 16 (one year earlier than the norm).
And she has a wonderful social life as well. I contribute this to the fact that as a home school child, she was still able to join the local schools track team and cheer leading squad. No social skills were lacking. Actually, she was quite popular with her public and privately schooled peers.
Ask Mark about home schooling, he is the teacher right now while his wife has gone back to school herself. He should know first hand, his children are very bright and talented.
New angle: what about the many states that allowed the lottery to come in, supposedly to provide funding for state sponsored schools?
Sorry, not into homeschooling. I think it is a response of parents that just can't let go and want to control every aspect of their kids. Suffocation for the kids, no one can bring together the resources that are available in most schools and most parents can't bring the skills to the table to enable their kids to take the subjects to the higher levels. And there is a real creative process and social understanding that takes place in learning with others and having diverse relationships. Making a 4.0 is not necessarily the point. Many kids do well in school and many of our colleges and universities are not exactly challenging in the first year classes. Most kids in the USA have to take a few math classes in college just to get up to speed for Calculus I. Why is that important anyway, so that we can compete in the technical areas and don't subsidize subjects that should have been covered in High School. There is no way that home schooling parents can match what is available in public schools. I have heard many of the arguments but basically I think it comes down to parents who can not deal with separation anxiety, have major control issues and want to keep their children brain washed, dependent on their personal views of the world and bound to them in every way. With some sort of luck their kids eventually get to college but to which ones?
Here is a home school parent/teachers rational for home school'n
http://www.homeeducator.com/FamilyTimes/articles/10-3article1.htm
Post a Comment