"Strangely, though, public schools were pretty good then."
What makes you think they are poor now?
What makes you think they are poor now?
I went to a public school as well.
Went to uni. after that, and quit that.
Found my hobby as a computer geek to be much more profitable then thought previously.
I can't see how you can call either public or private education a good or bad education.
Its not like they are teaching you critical information. You should really just come away with the methodology of how to think. Or at least START to think. If kids don't want to learn, they won't. Period.
And I find it funny, how the real focus is actaully on the monetary policy here. What about the actual kids?
Went to uni. after that, and quit that.
Found my hobby as a computer geek to be much more profitable then thought previously.
I can't see how you can call either public or private education a good or bad education.
Its not like they are teaching you critical information. You should really just come away with the methodology of how to think. Or at least START to think. If kids don't want to learn, they won't. Period.
And I find it funny, how the real focus is actaully on the monetary policy here. What about the actual kids?
They should privatize all schools, uncle sam has no business trying to teach kids there to incompetent.
Jjm lack of competition and accountability have led us to where we are now. no one is saying that the public education system can't do its job but under the current system of layer upon layer of administrators, bureaucrats etc.. it is not. Again vested interests will not allow for any meaningful change they have to protect their paper pushing backsides somehow. So why not try something new or do you also subscribe to the theory that it is "risky"?
There is the option of home schooling. I wonder if the vouchers work in that case. Do the parents get the money
if they teach the child themselves? They should, in my opinion.
That would be idiotic.
Parents: "Ok, Ive got the check. Now all I have to do is buy Johnny a playstation, fill out these little bubbles with a #2 pencil and keep the difference"
if they teach the child themselves? They should, in my opinion.
That would be idiotic.
Parents: "Ok, Ive got the check. Now all I have to do is buy Johnny a playstation, fill out these little bubbles with a #2 pencil and keep the difference"
SammySon - Forget the monetary policy. It has been stated that private schools are better. We should make sure government enables every kid to get the highest quality education possible. Vouchers covering 100% of all costs are clearly the answer.
dolphins - It's great that we agree. Oh, how much do you think a full subsidy for every child might cost? We already know that tuition at private schools is pretty high. Maybe we could increase local property taxes. How about using some of the projected budget surplus? It's worth it. Education is this administration's top priority. We don't want to shortchange our kids by continuing to throw cash into the broken education system. We can throw even more into the voucher subsidy. At least we'll get 100% guaranteed bang for our buck! Not a single kid will fail ever again.
dolphins - It's great that we agree. Oh, how much do you think a full subsidy for every child might cost? We already know that tuition at private schools is pretty high. Maybe we could increase local property taxes. How about using some of the projected budget surplus? It's worth it. Education is this administration's top priority. We don't want to shortchange our kids by continuing to throw cash into the broken education system. We can throw even more into the voucher subsidy. At least we'll get 100% guaranteed bang for our buck! Not a single kid will fail ever again.
Well i live in N.Y.C. now and the average spent per student is over 9,000 dollars per year , i think that ought to just about do it. Give me that amount and i am sure i can find plenty of private schools currently in business or would be in business based on that amount, to adequately educate my children
Wingnut, its always been like this, since the early 80s, probably before. Local politics control TO MUCH of the education system. It has nothing to do with Bush, it has everything to do with the people on the school boards.
No really. My son is six, and goes to public school. I honestly think he is doing very well. My neighbors (across the street) have three school-age kids. All of them are doing well. My next-door neighbor's kid is not doing so well. But I think his parents are doing a crappy job.
Why is it the schools that are to blame, and not the parents? And let's say my next-door neighbor's kid went to private school... Would he necessarily be doing any better?
What makes you think that public schools are to blame?
Why is it the schools that are to blame, and not the parents? And let's say my next-door neighbor's kid went to private school... Would he necessarily be doing any better?
What makes you think that public schools are to blame?
Can some one explain this to me? What do private schooled kids have when they graduate that public schooled
kids don't?
It depends on the public school that you compare to. If it is one of the poorer public schools, the ability to read and the ability to multiply in one's head come to mind.
kids don't?
It depends on the public school that you compare to. If it is one of the poorer public schools, the ability to read and the ability to multiply in one's head come to mind.
As to 100% guarantee. Nothing is guaranteed in life if it were that simple we wouldnt be having this discussion, all we'd have to do is increase the budget by 5% every year and things would be fine unfortunately that is not the case. Drastic problems require drastic measures but again abolishing the system in a short amount of time is not feasible. But nowhere does it say that we can't start somewhere albeit slowly.
wingznut pez
Why is it the schools that are to blame, and not the parents? And let's say my next-door neighbor's kid went to private school... Would he necessarily be doing any better?
Thats the crux of this whole discussion you send them to public school now because you dont have a choice. Your children may or may not do better but if given the ability to say "hey this blows" and finding something better which would you choose?
Why is it the schools that are to blame, and not the parents? And let's say my next-door neighbor's kid went to private school... Would he necessarily be doing any better?
Thats the crux of this whole discussion you send them to public school now because you dont have a choice. Your children may or may not do better but if given the ability to say "hey this blows" and finding something better which would you choose?
dolphins - I work on the Street. I think the going rate for private schools in NY is already higher than $9,000.
There is also a waiting list to get in. I wonder how long it would take to set up dozens and dozens of new schools? Where would the teachers come from? I hope they don't raid other private schools; that would just weaken them! I certainly hope they don't take any from the public schools. We all know that every one of those teachers is worse than inept.
Well, we could try recruiting elsewhere around the country. But that ignores the fact that many school districts can't find enough teachers to fill vacancies, even with signing bonuses.
Well, maybe the private schools could just pay teachers more to create incentives for new teachers to pursue the profession. Of course, that might mean higher costs and higher tuition, but with the government footing 100% of the bill, I am sure that there will be adequate oversight to control costs.
We are certain that offering to increase current teacher pay is not the way to attract qualified applicants to the public school system. This will work only in the voucher-subsidized private school environment. It is absolutely clear that everything a private school touches turns to gold. I should know, I taught in a private high school 18 years ago.
There is also a waiting list to get in. I wonder how long it would take to set up dozens and dozens of new schools? Where would the teachers come from? I hope they don't raid other private schools; that would just weaken them! I certainly hope they don't take any from the public schools. We all know that every one of those teachers is worse than inept.
Well, we could try recruiting elsewhere around the country. But that ignores the fact that many school districts can't find enough teachers to fill vacancies, even with signing bonuses.
Well, maybe the private schools could just pay teachers more to create incentives for new teachers to pursue the profession. Of course, that might mean higher costs and higher tuition, but with the government footing 100% of the bill, I am sure that there will be adequate oversight to control costs.
We are certain that offering to increase current teacher pay is not the way to attract qualified applicants to the public school system. This will work only in the voucher-subsidized private school environment. It is absolutely clear that everything a private school touches turns to gold. I should know, I taught in a private high school 18 years ago.
Jjm nothing is etched in stone, but honestly how are we ever to find out unless we try. In the early 60's there were many detractors claiming we could not put a man on the moon but it did happen. remaining static will only lead to less and worse. BTW my parents were able to send me to private school at the cost of 35 dollars a week growing up in miami in the 70's.
"Your children may or may not do better but if given the ability to say "hey this blows" and finding something better which would you choose?"
But I'd only have the choice of the voucher if the school fails to meet pre-determined requirements. So, if the school passes said levels, but it still "blows", then I'm in the same boat. Certainly just because it meets a criteria, doesn't mean it's a good school.
If I didn't feel that the school was giving enough to my son, then I'd take over where they left off. And actually I do now. Even though I feel my boy's school is doing well, we still supplement his education daily.
(Clarification: I've been a little inconsistant when talking about my kids. I have two boys. One is 3 and the other is almost 7. Obviously, the younger doesn't go to public school.)
Btw, my older son went to private pre-school/kindegarten. And I thought that was quite inferior to his public kindegarten and beyond. To make a blanket statement like "private schools are better", can be very inaccurate.
But I'd only have the choice of the voucher if the school fails to meet pre-determined requirements. So, if the school passes said levels, but it still "blows", then I'm in the same boat. Certainly just because it meets a criteria, doesn't mean it's a good school.
If I didn't feel that the school was giving enough to my son, then I'd take over where they left off. And actually I do now. Even though I feel my boy's school is doing well, we still supplement his education daily.
(Clarification: I've been a little inconsistant when talking about my kids. I have two boys. One is 3 and the other is almost 7. Obviously, the younger doesn't go to public school.)
Btw, my older son went to private pre-school/kindegarten. And I thought that was quite inferior to his public kindegarten and beyond. To make a blanket statement like "private schools are better", can be very inaccurate.
The public school system is an abject failure. Competition would force them in to ACTUALLY doing the job
that they are supposed to be doing. That would be best for your kids. This is not a difficult concept.
I agree that the public school system is a failure. This is nothing new. However, (what might barely pass for) competition is not a fix-all for our country's educational problems. Who is competing? Who is "they"? You have created a scapegoat -- a collage of professions, positions and authorities -- that you can blame problems on and seek to punish.
Is "they" the teachers? They dont get paid anything extra for teaching more kids. They get less stress for teaching fewer kids. In short, they gain when parents choose private schools over public schools. Please dont suggest decreasing pay when students leave or increasing pay when students enroll. This would only cause overcrowding of classrooms for the sake of profit.
Is "they" the administrators? They dont care about enrollment; thier salaries are not affected. If they run out of money, they'll borrow it, "tumble" the numbers, cut programs, stop buying books or fire teachers. They will let schools go completely to hel(l) (am I allowed to say hel l on anands?) before they take a pay cut or start looking for other jobs.
Is "they" the students? I hope not. They will suffer from decreased programs, lack of books, overcrowded classrooms, etc when funds are taken away.
These programs seek to punish "them" for providing poor schools. The problem is twofold. 1) Punishment does not work. 2) There is no "them" to punish. The only people who have anything to lose from these programs are the students whose parents cannot afford to pay for the other 80% of a private school. The only way for the students to win would be for the government to pay the entire bill for private school.
(I know that vouchers pay for different percentages dependent on location. I'm looking at New York, where tuition for a good-but-not expensive private (religous) school is $16,000 for 8th grade. Private, non-religous schools are more expensive.)
that they are supposed to be doing. That would be best for your kids. This is not a difficult concept.
I agree that the public school system is a failure. This is nothing new. However, (what might barely pass for) competition is not a fix-all for our country's educational problems. Who is competing? Who is "they"? You have created a scapegoat -- a collage of professions, positions and authorities -- that you can blame problems on and seek to punish.
Is "they" the teachers? They dont get paid anything extra for teaching more kids. They get less stress for teaching fewer kids. In short, they gain when parents choose private schools over public schools. Please dont suggest decreasing pay when students leave or increasing pay when students enroll. This would only cause overcrowding of classrooms for the sake of profit.
Is "they" the administrators? They dont care about enrollment; thier salaries are not affected. If they run out of money, they'll borrow it, "tumble" the numbers, cut programs, stop buying books or fire teachers. They will let schools go completely to hel(l) (am I allowed to say hel l on anands?) before they take a pay cut or start looking for other jobs.
Is "they" the students? I hope not. They will suffer from decreased programs, lack of books, overcrowded classrooms, etc when funds are taken away.
These programs seek to punish "them" for providing poor schools. The problem is twofold. 1) Punishment does not work. 2) There is no "them" to punish. The only people who have anything to lose from these programs are the students whose parents cannot afford to pay for the other 80% of a private school. The only way for the students to win would be for the government to pay the entire bill for private school.
(I know that vouchers pay for different percentages dependent on location. I'm looking at New York, where tuition for a good-but-not expensive private (religous) school is $16,000 for 8th grade. Private, non-religous schools are more expensive.)
- Oct 28, 1999
- 62,484
- 8,345
- 126
I've seen the statement "it's the poor schools that are the bad ones". I agree. The problem is that a portion of your school's income is based upon a) the property taxes and income taxes of the people in that area and b) booster club donations by the parents.
Logically speaking, if you are in a "poor" school district, it's because the people in that area are "poor". If the people in that area are "poor" then a voucher to cover 1/3 to 1/2 of what it costs to send one kid to private schools is no where enough money to actually provide the parents the means to put the kids there.
Logically speaking, if you are in a "poor" school district, it's because the people in that area are "poor". If the people in that area are "poor" then a voucher to cover 1/3 to 1/2 of what it costs to send one kid to private schools is no where enough money to actually provide the parents the means to put the kids there.
But I'd only have the choice of the voucher if the school fails to meet pre-determined requirements. So, if the school passes said levels, but it still "blows", then I'm in the same boat. Certainly just because it meets a criteria, doesn't mean it's a good school
As it stands now yes but dont you think things would change if this were enacted. behaviour modified, administrators that actually started to take their jobs seriously, bureaucrats knowing that someone was watching, custodians finally making less than the teachers, books in classrooms. Again maybe even some more private schools able to compete and adeqautely teach your children.....
As it stands now yes but dont you think things would change if this were enacted. behaviour modified, administrators that actually started to take their jobs seriously, bureaucrats knowing that someone was watching, custodians finally making less than the teachers, books in classrooms. Again maybe even some more private schools able to compete and adeqautely teach your children.....
Now if you continue to believe that it is not that bad, that minor tinkering can fix it a little red tape cut here a little extra funding there, then fine leave the debate as is and we will be back here in ten years debating the same issue. Meanwhile SAT scores continue to decline , unless they keep dumbing it down, failure rates increase and more and more graduates turn into hamburger flippers while foreign graduates come into the country and take more and more of the higher paying jobs because our system can't produce them. Good day
<< Can the Bush fans explain this to me? >>
Let me answer as a Bush fan: you see, sometimes in life you think Everythings Zen, but really you just don't wanna come back down from this cloud. Its the Little Things that Kill to be honest. I, on the other hand, love my motorcycle so I'm a bit of a Machinehead...
Oh! George Bush!
...
nevermind
Fascinating. Still no one tries to refute the point that partial subsidies are anything other than a nod to socio-economic class warfare.
<< SammySon - Forget the monetary policy. It has been stated that private schools are better. We should make sure government enables >>
Who states that?
Public school was put there for what it was named, the public.
You must pay for private school, because that is an OPTION you have.
If any religion is taught in that school, it should not get govt. money. Yay for kids, yay for education, not yay for my tax money going into a religious organization. In any sense at all.
Public schooling needs to be improved, thats a given.
Use my hard earned money towards that. But not a private organization.
Thats just straight up not acceptable.
If you cannot afford a private school, why is it the tax payers responsibility to take up your slack?
You don't have the money, oh guess what, they built a public school in your area. If your that concerned, then work with your child everyday on his schooling after school.
LOL... Very nice, Optimus.
Again, I'm not so sure the schools are where to point the finger. Today's kids aren't held accountable often enough. (Well, people in general aren't held accountable... but that's for another thread. ) Anyway, if my kid isn't doing well in school, I'm going to find out what the problem is. If it is him being lazy, then he's getting his @ss kicked. If it's the public school, then I'll supplement his education. Actually, even if he's doing well, I'll still (and do) supplement his education. If there are other reasons, then I'll address those.
I still say that the parents are much more to blame, then just pointing a finger at the schools. Kids are declining in other ways than education. Ethics, marturity, morals... just generally being respectful and responsible. Those things should be learned at home. Not at school.
You take failing kids, with crappy parents, and stick them in a public school... I don't see them any more successful.
Again, I'm not so sure the schools are where to point the finger. Today's kids aren't held accountable often enough. (Well, people in general aren't held accountable... but that's for another thread.
) Anyway, if my kid isn't doing well in school, I'm going to find out what the problem is. If it is him being lazy, then he's getting his @ss kicked. If it's the public school, then I'll supplement his education. Actually, even if he's doing well, I'll still (and do) supplement his education. If there are other reasons, then I'll address those. I still say that the parents are much more to blame, then just pointing a finger at the schools. Kids are declining in other ways than education. Ethics, marturity, morals... just generally being respectful and responsible. Those things should be learned at home. Not at school.
You take failing kids, with crappy parents, and stick them in a public school... I don't see them any more successful.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
News NVIDIA and Intel to Develop AI Infrastructure and Personal Computing Products- Started by poke01
- Replies: 411
Facebook
Twitter