• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Bye, Bye Any Hope for Vouchers

J

jjm

Golden Member
Link


WASHINGTON, June 12 ? The Senate defeated an amendment today that would have permitted low- income parents in 10 cities to use taxpayer dollars to send their children to private and religious schools.

The vote ? 58 to 41 ? effectively buried one of the cornerstones of President Bush's education platform, despite a hard push by conservatives who viewed this year's education debate as their best chance to sell the idea. Three Democrats voted for the proposal and 11 Republicans voted against it.
 
This just goes to show that the both the Democrats and Republicans are to blame for letting poorer childrens' educations suffer. Such a shame, really.
 
Actually vouchers are not the answer. The schools in poorer neighborhoods need to recieve more funding. They need to build better schools, with better learning tools, and more good teachers. I do fully support Bush though that teachers need to be tested.
 


<< This just goes to show that the both the Democrats and Republicans are to blame for letting poorer childrens' educations suffer. Such a shame, really. >>



Well, I don't think private schools are all that much better and instead of giving the money to these kids to go to them, it should go to the schools to help improve them.
 
Urinal - I think something should be done, but vouchers, at least the plan proposed by GWB, would have done nothing to help the poor. The amount would have been capped at $2500, and with average parochial school tuition over $5000 and average private school tuition over $8000, poor familes would not have been able to afford the difference anyway.

The correct voucher plan, one truly designed to help the needy, would provide for 90% or more (preferably 100%) of the cost of going to any school that a student can qualify for. The problem for GWB is that he could not afford tax cuts if he did that. The partial plan would have simply provided a break to people who already send their kids to parochial or private schools. So his plan is a sham, and the Senate knew it.
 
Well, I don't think private schools are all that much better and instead of giving the money to these kids to go to them, it should go to the schools to help improve them.

So basicaly you're saying that if parents want to send their kids to a private school they should not only pay the cost of the private school, but they should make a donation to the public schools?

Viper GTS
 
Let's face it. Absentee parents, teachers of limited intelligence and children who are not pushed hard and given discipline are the cause. Extra cash to recruit better teachers (not the bottom of the barrel of college grads as is often the case) is OK but just throwing more and more money at it is not the answer. Having every computer wired to the internet in the classroom is not the answer when the kids can't even read or write well!!!!

 
Viper - Nice spin.

Everyone pays taxes because society as a whole enjoys substantial benefits as a result of the education provided to its citizens. Society also has the obligation to provide quality education, which in too many urban areas it fails to do at present.

If parents voluntarily choose to opt out of the education provided by the state and pay for alternatives, so be it. But don't expect me or anyone else to subsidize their choice. I send my son to a private school, but I don't expect the government to &quot;gimme, gimme, gimme&quot; for the choice I made. In fact, the local public schools are excellent, so I choose a private school for more reasons beyond just the quality of instruction.
 
There was a study done in Chicago. I am not going to specify schools or districts because I do not remember them.

A new superintendent was hired. He was fielding suggestions on how to best fix the problem with extremely low test scores. The teacher's union suggested putting nearly $500,000 into hiring new teachers to reduce class size. The superintendent went along, and class sizes were reduced significantly. When the results of the tests came back, it was found that test scores DROPPED significantly. Math scores which were about 22% pass rate, dropped about 7% to 15% pass rate. Reading scores also dropped by some 4%. Not only had the scores NOT improved, but they had worsened. Superintendent was asked to resign.

Now, if dumping more money into schools is the ANSWER, why didnt it work?

NOTE: I made no judgement on what does and does not work, I just stated a study that was done.
 
The reason it failed is because the teacher's unions lobbied heavily against it. They also lobbied against anything that would hold them accountable if their school's children begin to do poorly.

Bottom line, they dont want to be held accountable.
 
I went to a small private college (Manchester College in North Manchester, Indiana). It was common to hear &quot;oh he/she wasn't very good at (insert major here) so they decided to do education instead.&quot; I think this is an indication of how little desire there is to teach, and those who do, many are not mentally endowed.

Tex, you talking about the vouchers? Of course the teachers' unions lobbied against it. It would mean that they would either a) have to do their jobs, or b) lose their jobs. I generalize here, and note that I think their are some EXCELLENT teachers out there.
 
Money is wasted by the bucket loads in the public school system.. My poor school district has the equivalent of 16,500 per year per student, not including federal monies which are off budget.. It is a poor Low Wealth district.. How much more money per student could they possibly need to provide a decent educational opportunity? WE should ask, but they'll never have and end to that number... No amount will ever be enough.. Private schools by me range from 2,500 to 6,000 and the children in them have a curriculm and books..
 
If a teacher's starting salary were $50,000/yr, I think we would begin to see children become better educated within 10 years. You have to induce bright, go-getter types to WANT to teach, rather than scrape from the bottom of the barrel those that don't aspire or those that just want a 9-month-a-year job.

Somehow, though, you still have to hold parents accountable for instilling the desire to learn in their children. Parents don't care about their own kid's education most of the time, and that reflects in the child's performance. Education was paramount in my household, and as a result, I feel I did very well.
 
It is jsut another example of how inefficient government is at any level. Private schools tend to be better organized and better disciplined. Teachers cannot get a job at a private school unless they show a true desire to teach. It is just too bad that there are not enuf people who WANT to be teachers
 
Schools will not be improved by throwing more $ at them. The problem is far deeper that $. We have schools full of teachers that should not be teaching. We have parents that don't give a damn about their kids and don't make them do their homework or even care if they went to school or not. We have curriculum that is more based towards making a kid feel good about him/herself and giving them high self esteem instead of actually TEACHING them.

Now tell me....how is more $ going to help any of that?

We need teacher testing to insure that the teachers are doing their jobs well.
We need more involved parents who actually care about their kids(probably not fixable since we have thousands of parents who just don't care.)
We need to actually teach the kids and not worry about if their self esteem is being damaged because Johnny got an F or was held back a grade. Self esteem may make you feel good but it sure won't pay the bills in the real world.

If you thing more $ is the answer then you are flat out wrong. Here in Oklahoma the idiots passed HB1017 several years ago which was supposed to &quot;save the schools.&quot; It raised our taxes considerably, gave the schools TONS of more $, fixed up a lot of old schools &amp; built new ones, hired more teachers, etc....did it do any good? No, in fact our test scores as a whole have been going down, down, down. You can see this repeated all over the country. Until people realize that $ is not the be all end all cure for our education problems and actually start holding the schools and teachers responsible then the problems will continue.
 
Vouchers sure sound like a swell idea, and i agree with you oddly enough jjm, that if we were to offer them, it should be at a substantially higher level of subsidy. However, that presupposes that i think that vouchers are a good idea to begin with, or that the Federal government should have anything to do with what is Constitutionally a local or state issue. The Senate made the right decision, although likely for the wrong reasons.
 


<< Let's face it. Absentee parents, teachers of limited intelligence and children who are not pushed hard and given discipline are the cause. Extra cash to recruit better teachers (not the bottom of the barrel of college grads as is often the case) is OK but just throwing more and more money at it is not the answer. Having every computer wired to the internet in the classroom is not the answer when the kids can't even read or write well!!!! >>



Hmmmmmm
Well absentee parents are the norm today for both rich and poor, and in every neighborhood. Most kids grow up in homes where both parents have jobs or careers.

You list teachers of limited intelligence as a problem but then you say &quot;just throwing more and more money at it is not the answer.&quot; Well how are poor schools suppose to get better teachers unless they pay more?

Kids are not pushed to learn. But inspired to learn. I believe that if schools in poorer neighborhoods had the money to spend to buy good teaching tools 9(ex. computers) and latest teaching material the kids in poorer neighborhoods would be better educated. That is why I was so critical of the republicans wanting to do away with HEADSTART. Which is program that pays for kids to go to pre school. Money is the answer. The problem is spending the money the right way.
 
My poor low wealth district has one of the highest teacher salary averages for the state of New York.. We have 10,000 applicants for a position at any given time... If there is a teacher shortage we don't know it, but yet our scores are at the bottom of the heap. Very few graduate as a percentage of the original class.. We have ditto's instead of books,, copy machines in almost every building... and a negotiation with the teachers union to never discuss a common curriculm.. The sad thing is that reforms have been discussed for over 15 years now, and the graduating class that can't read is long gone.. But none to worry, we will get it right some day...
 
Viper: Absolutely yes. &quot;Free&quot; public education has been one of the cornerstones of USA ever since it was founded. If you want private schooling, then pay for it-in addition to your regular tax burden. Every US taxpayer pays for public schools to some extent-even if they never had kids, or their kids out of school, etc.

One basic concern I have about vouchers. I'm concerned that the major net effect would be to raise private school costs, not to make them more affordable. Look at college expenses. The amount of government aid &amp; the like has been going steadily up. But the university I went to 20+ years ago (at less than $1000 per semester, including room &amp; board) is now more like $7-8,000 a semester. General inflation didn't go up that much.
 
i'm glad it failed. education should be handled locally IMO, not on a federal level.



<< We have curriculum that is more based towards making a kid feel good about him/herself and giving them high self esteem instead of actually TEACHING them. >>



this may be true in your area, but in the area I live it's not this way at all. B/c schools and students are tested for performance yearly gauged against other schools and students so it is entirely performance oriented. IMO there has been a lack of self esteem teaching and important social skills, so much so we now have school shootings 🙁
 
Viper:

<< Fine, then let them get a tax refund for the school taxes they paid but won't be using. >>



Did you actually read the post and understand it?

Here is what you are saying, when applied to other areas of government:

There are roads in my county that I never drive on...so I should not pay taxes for those. Oh, and I never see the fountain at town hall, so I should never pay for that. There are 155 schools in my county, and my kids only go to two of them, so I should not have to pay for the other 153. That waste treatment plant does not take garbage from my housing development, so I should not have to pay for that either. Those trees they planted in the park? I never go to the park, so I should not have to pay for the trees, either.

Oh, and those cops that have the beat across town, I do not want my tax dollars paying for them, either.

Dumb, dumb, dumb.
 


<< There was a study done in Chicago. I am not going to specify schools or districts because I do not remember them.

A new superintendent was hired. He was fielding suggestions on how to best fix the problem with extremely low test scores. The teacher's union suggested putting nearly $500,000 into hiring new teachers to reduce class size. The superintendent went along, and class sizes were reduced significantly. When the results of the tests came back, it was found that test scores DROPPED significantly. Math scores which were about 22% pass rate, dropped about 7% to 15% pass rate. Reading scores also dropped by some 4%. Not only had the scores NOT improved, but they had worsened. Superintendent was asked to resign.

Now, if dumping more money into schools is the ANSWER, why didnt it work?

NOTE: I made no judgement on what does and does not work, I just stated a study that was done. >>




LOL That wont stop you from getting attacked!

The federal school budget failed THREE Audits and 1 BILLION dollars cant be accounted for. And people still want to throw even MORE money at the schools. LOL Show me a business that does that and I'll show you a failed business.
 
I'm in favor of some form of voucher, but I'll admit that's just a band-aid on the school problem.

The school system is a perfect implementation of Communism. A huge, top-heavy bureaucracy, inaccessible to the public, completely run by giant government programs with no accountability. No incentive for improvement. Ever-increasing budgets. Job security for life. Answerable to no one.

Yet we laugh at Communism for its obvious, inevitable failure, then turn around and employ the same type of system to allegedly educate our children.
 
Oh...the schools here are tested alright....with a test approved by the teacher's union. That group is another big obstacle in the way of kids learning. In my opinion they are more worried about covering their ass for bad teaching and saving their jobs than they are actually teaching kids.

Lack of teaching social skills and low self esteem may have something to do with school shootings, though I doubt it, but those things are supposed to be taught in the home. We shouldn't be taking the time away from actually learning just so we can make some kids feel better about themselves. Doing that robs the kids that are there to learn.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top