jjm, what's there to argue? The people already utilizing private schools (the more wealthy) will benefit the most. The middle/lower income will hardly benefit, if at all. The average subsidy will not allow the average three child family be able to afford private schooling. They'll be left with public schools, only with less funding.
Jjm yes in fact its an insidious plot by republicans to poison the atmosphere, destroy the alaska wildlife refuge and steal all the money from the poor. God knows they havent a clue what to do with it tahts why they are poor. But then again if they are poor where did they get the money? class warfare blah sounds way to keynesian and marxist for my liking. Might i suggest you read Ayn Rands book "Capitalism the unknown ideal" you may come to better understand what conservatives would really like to have happen. Sorry i can't continue but work and tax paying are calling me. Its been a pleasure discussing this topic with you.
- Oct 28, 1999
- 62,484
- 8,345
- 126
SammySon, I believe the voucher is a re-imbursement of what you as a taxpayer pay into your area's public school through property taxes in state taxes.
Wingznut PEZ. AMEN! You summed it up better than I could have. Decline in grades and test scores are a result of a decline the kids, not necessarily the schools.
I believe a big reason that parents who put their kids through private schools are a little more critical of their grades because that parent is coughing up anywhere from $5,000-$20,000 a year for that kid to go there. If that kid screws around and gets bad grades, I would bet that that parent is a little quicker to chew that kid's ass out for screwing around than a parent who doesn't have to pay and *extra* money to school their kid.
Wingznut PEZ. AMEN! You summed it up better than I could have. Decline in grades and test scores are a result of a decline the kids, not necessarily the schools.
I believe a big reason that parents who put their kids through private schools are a little more critical of their grades because that parent is coughing up anywhere from $5,000-$20,000 a year for that kid to go there. If that kid screws around and gets bad grades, I would bet that that parent is a little quicker to chew that kid's ass out for screwing around than a parent who doesn't have to pay and *extra* money to school their kid.
dolphins - Nice display of frustration since you can't logically challenge my point; a large loss of credibility. Explain again how everyone benefits at the same time?
"Decline in grades and test scores are a result of a decline the kids, not necessarily the schools."
Nope, you win. You summed it up much better than I did. Kudos!
Nope, you win. You summed it up much better than I did. Kudos!
Having gone to both public and private schools I can't see where the public schools are capable of being fixed due to their insoluble problems. They can't be selective about which students they admit, can't discipline their students, must pander the the mediocrity demanded by the local electorate, and frequently must be located in socially toxic areas. Many public school students are good people, but trying to learn while dealing with thuggish lower class trash is an unnecessary hassle for students who want to have a future. Why drag the good down with the losers? School vouchers are a way to help parents (at least the ones who care) get their kids some education instead of rotting in their local trailer park/hood/ghetto. Catering to the lowest common denominator means oppressing the gifted and the motivated. BTW is little class warfare is fine with me since, after close inspection, I find the US lower classes deserve what they get. My parents came from poverty, but they worked their way to prosperity. This has gone out of fashion except among immigrants. Fvck the zeros, they like where they are and wallow in it.
jjm: You're pulling a whole lot of unsubstantiated, senseless B.S. out of your ass, considering that vouchers have never been tried, thanks in part to folks like you and special interest groups 
shantanu my sentiments exactly. you can go round and round but if you dont try it you wont find out. Hopefully bush rams it up the special interests and liberals wazoo and the country becomes a better place because of it. Hows that Jjm i can not continue to go round and round in a senseless debate when i've already made my point and i think i answered myputers question in my first post, feel free to reread my posts when time permits.
I didnt know it was permitted to use the word ass in the forums though...interesting.
I didnt know it was permitted to use the word ass in the forums though...interesting.
<< Still no one tries to refute the point that partial subsidies are anything other than a nod to socio-economic class warfare. >>
jjm,
Since you're smarter then that, I'll assume that your ridiculous assertion is designed simply to stimulate debate.
What partial subsidies really are is nothing more then pandering to the left. Bush knows that he has no hope of getting 100% subsidies past all the fat, happy bureaucrats suckling at the education teat, so he's compromising.
Russ, NCNE
There you go Russ... More insults, less content. At least this time you did it in a "passive-agressive" way.
monckywrench... So you are saying that only the wealthy deserve quality education? I can tell you are really in touch with what America's kids need.
monckywrench... So you are saying that only the wealthy deserve quality education? I can tell you are really in touch with what America's kids need.
Sorry to say this Russ, but time and time again, I've noticed that you're the dumb one here. Sure, you whip put witty one-liners. But you never lay out the logic of your arguments, which leads me to conclude that you rarely think critically. I am sorry that you didn't have a decent experience from your public education. There are millions beside you who did. BTW, other coutries that consistenly beat US kids all have public school systems. So don't just throw the word "privatization" around just because your "store-bought" ideology says that it's a cool word.
Point is the tax payers money should go into the public schools.
Not the hands of the people who pay for private schooling.
Would a voucher come in if a household's children were going to public school? Or just for households who have children in private schools?
Its their choice to send their children there, not mine, therefore I don't see why I should have to pay.
You live in a town, you pay the taxes for property, which will go into education funding. Regardless if your kids go to that school or not, you have to pay the taxes. Why should there be an exception?
That would in the end, undermind the whole public schooling system.
Why don't we all just send the children to catholic schools and shut down the public schooling system. That would solve it all!.
Oh, wait, you still have the same population of students, which would turn up the same results.
Not the hands of the people who pay for private schooling.
Would a voucher come in if a household's children were going to public school? Or just for households who have children in private schools?
Its their choice to send their children there, not mine, therefore I don't see why I should have to pay.
You live in a town, you pay the taxes for property, which will go into education funding. Regardless if your kids go to that school or not, you have to pay the taxes. Why should there be an exception?
That would in the end, undermind the whole public schooling system.
Why don't we all just send the children to catholic schools and shut down the public schooling system. That would solve it all!.
Oh, wait, you still have the same population of students, which would turn up the same results.
Ok, lets break this down again.... school is in session, now pay attention
Lets start with the FACTS. I've documented these facts many times in the past on here, use the magic search button if you want the links.
1. On average, private schools provide children with a better education than public schools, as measured by college graduation rates, graduation rates, future income rates, employer surveys, college graduation rates, graduate degree percentages, and standardized testing.
2. On average, we spend TWICE AS MUCH on each child in public school than we do on a child in private school. Don't give me any of this crap about private schools being more expensive -- if you measure how much money the school spends on a per pupil basis, public schools cost twice as much -- only to provide inferior results (see #1).
3. Private schools have a far lower dropout rate than public schools.
4. There is more violence (based on police reports) and drug usage levels are higher in public schools.
Now, given those facts, one CAN NOT conclude that private schools are automatically 'better' than public schools, because there are many possible factors that need to be considered before reaching such a conclusion, including socio-economic and cultural factors that are hard to measure or define.
We CAN however, decide that obviously the public school system the way it's structured now is costing us millions, and not producing the desired results. We must consider alternative courses of action.
I'm not sure that vouchers are the answer, but they might provide people that otherwise don't have the means to send their kids to private schools with a chance to do so. The way things stand now, the relatively wealthy are the only ones that have the option to choose their child's educators. Lets not forget that schools often teach as much in life lessons as they do in classroom lessons.
Lets start with the FACTS. I've documented these facts many times in the past on here, use the magic search button if you want the links.
1. On average, private schools provide children with a better education than public schools, as measured by college graduation rates, graduation rates, future income rates, employer surveys, college graduation rates, graduate degree percentages, and standardized testing.
2. On average, we spend TWICE AS MUCH on each child in public school than we do on a child in private school. Don't give me any of this crap about private schools being more expensive -- if you measure how much money the school spends on a per pupil basis, public schools cost twice as much -- only to provide inferior results (see #1).
3. Private schools have a far lower dropout rate than public schools.
4. There is more violence (based on police reports) and drug usage levels are higher in public schools.
Now, given those facts, one CAN NOT conclude that private schools are automatically 'better' than public schools, because there are many possible factors that need to be considered before reaching such a conclusion, including socio-economic and cultural factors that are hard to measure or define.
We CAN however, decide that obviously the public school system the way it's structured now is costing us millions, and not producing the desired results. We must consider alternative courses of action.
I'm not sure that vouchers are the answer, but they might provide people that otherwise don't have the means to send their kids to private schools with a chance to do so. The way things stand now, the relatively wealthy are the only ones that have the option to choose their child's educators. Lets not forget that schools often teach as much in life lessons as they do in classroom lessons.
Tagej,
I've followed these threads for a while. I have yet seen one shred of evidence to back up your claim #1.
I've followed these threads for a while. I have yet seen one shred of evidence to back up your claim #1.
I agree that (as a whole) private institutions are run better than goverment institutions. And I have no doubts that schooling is no different.
"I'm not sure that vouchers are the answer..."
Me neither
"...but they might provide people that otherwise don't have the means to send their kids to private schools with a chance to do so"
That, I don't believe.
"The way things stand now, the relatively wealthy are the only ones that have the option to choose their child's educators"
And those are the only ones that vouchers will help, imho.
"I'm not sure that vouchers are the answer..."
Me neither
"...but they might provide people that otherwise don't have the means to send their kids to private schools with a chance to do so"
That, I don't believe.
"The way things stand now, the relatively wealthy are the only ones that have the option to choose their child's educators"
And those are the only ones that vouchers will help, imho.
- Oct 28, 1999
- 62,484
- 8,345
- 126
tagej, it's not that easy though.
You are totally forgetting about rural schools, which may not make up a large percentage of total students, but do make up a large number of total schools.
I graduated with a class of 50 kids in a town of 2000 people. There were at least 6 other schools within a 20 mile radius of me that were similar in both class and town size.
Out of my class, 10 went into the military (lowers the college grad rates and lowers future income rates), at least 5 of them went on to work on the family farm (again lowering college grad rates and future incomes), several went on to enroll in nursing programs though the hospitals (again lowering the college grad rate and future income). Then there is always the certain percentage that hop right into the work force (again lowering the college grad rate and income), and then the rest of us went on to college.
Here's the deal though - a very large geographic percentage of the US is rural. For A LOT of us, there are only a very few private schools. For many of us, the closest private school is over 30 miles away, sometimes even farther.
For these rural, public schools, you will almost ALWAYS have lower college graduation rates than city based schools. You will almost ALWAYS have lower incomes because of the rural nature of the area. There are a lot of us rural people that want absolutely nothing to do with big cities reguardless of the income increase that they may have.
I see it more of a problem with city schools vs. rurual schools. Too many large cities have far too few of schools for the students that they have to support. City schools also have the violence and drug issues as well. Too many people consider the entire public school system a waste simply because they don't work in big cities. They neglect to think about the thousands of rural and small town public schools that do a DAMN FINE job of educating kids.
Maybe we need to spend a little more time looking into how to correct the current problem instead of throwing on a band aide and making a new one.
You are totally forgetting about rural schools, which may not make up a large percentage of total students, but do make up a large number of total schools.
I graduated with a class of 50 kids in a town of 2000 people. There were at least 6 other schools within a 20 mile radius of me that were similar in both class and town size.
Out of my class, 10 went into the military (lowers the college grad rates and lowers future income rates), at least 5 of them went on to work on the family farm (again lowering college grad rates and future incomes), several went on to enroll in nursing programs though the hospitals (again lowering the college grad rate and future income). Then there is always the certain percentage that hop right into the work force (again lowering the college grad rate and income), and then the rest of us went on to college.
Here's the deal though - a very large geographic percentage of the US is rural. For A LOT of us, there are only a very few private schools. For many of us, the closest private school is over 30 miles away, sometimes even farther.
For these rural, public schools, you will almost ALWAYS have lower college graduation rates than city based schools. You will almost ALWAYS have lower incomes because of the rural nature of the area. There are a lot of us rural people that want absolutely nothing to do with big cities reguardless of the income increase that they may have.
I see it more of a problem with city schools vs. rurual schools. Too many large cities have far too few of schools for the students that they have to support. City schools also have the violence and drug issues as well. Too many people consider the entire public school system a waste simply because they don't work in big cities. They neglect to think about the thousands of rural and small town public schools that do a DAMN FINE job of educating kids.
Maybe we need to spend a little more time looking into how to correct the current problem instead of throwing on a band aide and making a new one.
This is a very interesting subject and hopefully I can give some input. I live in Sweden and here we have had this voucher system since the beginning of the nineties.
It gives the student who want to switch schools an amount estimated to be equal to what would have been spent on them in the public school. The private schools are then not allowed to charge anything (or at least not more than 300-400 USD or something) on top of that to prevent this from subsidizing rich people's education. If the private schools need more to fund their education they can always turn to the private sector for sponsorship or whatever.
In addition of course there also remains the traditional private schools where you pay a 100% yourself.
What's been extremely good about this system, apart from the fact that parents and kids now are free to choose the education they want, is the results of a evaluation of this reform that was published this week. This survey concludes that not only have children been able to choose better education but it has also provided better education for the children remaining in public schools since the COMPETITION has forced them to dramatically raise their standards.
Of course you can't be sure the results would be the same in the US but since competition usually has this effect of raising quality it's very likely.
It gives the student who want to switch schools an amount estimated to be equal to what would have been spent on them in the public school. The private schools are then not allowed to charge anything (or at least not more than 300-400 USD or something) on top of that to prevent this from subsidizing rich people's education. If the private schools need more to fund their education they can always turn to the private sector for sponsorship or whatever.
In addition of course there also remains the traditional private schools where you pay a 100% yourself.
What's been extremely good about this system, apart from the fact that parents and kids now are free to choose the education they want, is the results of a evaluation of this reform that was published this week. This survey concludes that not only have children been able to choose better education but it has also provided better education for the children remaining in public schools since the COMPETITION has forced them to dramatically raise their standards.
Of course you can't be sure the results would be the same in the US but since competition usually has this effect of raising quality it's very likely.
Very nice perspective, cosmo.
Unfortunately, (from what I understand) the vouchers proposed in the US wouldn't even cover half the tuition of the average private school.
Unfortunately, (from what I understand) the vouchers proposed in the US wouldn't even cover half the tuition of the average private school.
Cosmo,
The US has several hurdles: teacher's unions, the democrat party, and a media that tends to portray school choice as a Bad Thing. Good to hear logic is alive and well abroad, though.
The US has several hurdles: teacher's unions, the democrat party, and a media that tends to portray school choice as a Bad Thing. Good to hear logic is alive and well abroad, though.
<< The way things stand now, the relatively wealthy are the only ones that have the option to choose their child's educators" And those are the only ones that vouchers will help, imho. >>
Wonderfully said PEZ.
Rules are made to keep the rich, rich.
Thoes schools are better because there is a minority that fills them.
Upperclass suburbanites.
When you start to analyze the melting pot we call the public school system, SO MANY more factors come into play that you can't measure which provides a better education.
Of course a school with a lower student to teacher ratio and more funding will get better results.
But as always you are, PAYING to educate your children beyond what the government that you live under provides. You pay that school tax because you live here and have children. And that money goes into the education system in the public sector. Why should that change?
Oh, to give back that money to the people who can already afford the private schooling. I see no logic in that at all.
So essentially, you just segregating america again, based on income.
vi_edit, good point. Some of the studies that I've seen do take into account the locations of the schools -- for example, they might compare a public rural school with a private rural school within a certain radius. Of course, there are inherent problems with trying to measure anything as vague as "good schools", and certainly income and education is not the only way to measure schools (as Pennstate's thread shows).
I'm simply suggesting that we need to take a good hard look at how the public school system functions and what we can do with it to make it better. It's clear to me that in it's current form it's not doing very well. Vouchers may be one possible alternative, but it's certainly not the only thing we have available.
The number one thing to a successful school is kids that have parents that care. The school can be falling apart, but if the parents really care and are involved, kids can learn. The lack of discipline and parental involvment can NOT be fixed with any amount of simple spending or vouchers.
I'm simply suggesting that we need to take a good hard look at how the public school system functions and what we can do with it to make it better. It's clear to me that in it's current form it's not doing very well. Vouchers may be one possible alternative, but it's certainly not the only thing we have available.
The number one thing to a successful school is kids that have parents that care. The school can be falling apart, but if the parents really care and are involved, kids can learn. The lack of discipline and parental involvment can NOT be fixed with any amount of simple spending or vouchers.
- Oct 28, 1999
- 62,484
- 8,345
- 126
<< The number one thing to a successful school is kids that have parents that care. The school can be falling apart, but if the parents really care and are involved, kids can learn. The lack of discipline and parental involvment can NOT be fixed with any amount of simple spending or vouchers. >>
I agree 100%
I'm going to out on a limb here and say that the parents of students enrolled in a private school are more "involved" in the students education. I'm not using "involved" and interested/concerned interchangeably here.
What I am trying to say that I believe there is a very good chance that the parents who kick out several thousand dollars for grade school/high school student's tuition have more direct involvement in a students education. At least I would be. If I'm kicking out $5,000 a year you bet I'm going to be on that kids tail making sure that he's earning his keep. Unfortunately, since there really are no "out of pocket" expenses for a public school, I don't think that a lot of parents have a financial interest in the students schooling, and therefore don't emphasise it as much.
This necessarily wasn't the case for me and my family, but I do know many parents that looked as grade school/high school as "free" child care and nothing more.
I think it is this financial involvement that makes a huge difference between the "quality" of the students.
Jellybaby
I don't think the Union situation or the Democrat party is the biggest obstacle.
FYI in Sweden we have a ruling SOCIALIST party (how funny is that) and a situation were practically everyone is a member of the union (and the ones that are not are anyway obliged to follow union rulings and regulations).
I think the media is the most important factor and for some reason all press in Sweden is conservative or liberal which has greatly helped this reform.
I don't think the Union situation or the Democrat party is the biggest obstacle.
FYI in Sweden we have a ruling SOCIALIST party (how funny is that) and a situation were practically everyone is a member of the union (and the ones that are not are anyway obliged to follow union rulings and regulations).
I think the media is the most important factor and for some reason all press in Sweden is conservative or liberal which has greatly helped this reform.
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
-
-
Facebook
Twitter