I think your example proved my point, “eh”? You stated that private schools do not need to accept everone, while public schools do. But your example shows that some public schools, if they feel like it, and if they have room, will (not must) accept some kids outside their district.
In other words, for the poorest students – who, let’s face it, are the ones most likely to be stuck in a district with failing schools – there is no such choice. It would be lovely if all of us could move to places with excellent public schools, if every kid could be in a district like the one where I taught for a year (where the big dilemma for the administration was whether to install new grass tennis courts or build a television studio at the high school) but that isn’t reality. I’ve yet to see any rationale for accepting this status quo and I ask – if not vouchers to remedy the problem, how about if we eliminate the concept of school districts where funding and facilities is based on tax revenues from only the local community? Should kids in Albany have better schools and better education than kids in the Bronx? Should kids in Beverly Hills have more access to computers in the classrooms or a lower student:teacher ratio than the kids in South Central?
And yet they’re still spending less per student than the very small, very population-dense and very crappy-schooled District of Columbia. Go figure.
You’re absolutely right that some individual public schools get to pick their students. Some of them even get to pick and choose among the students in their district. You know what- those selective public HS in NYC like Stuyvesant tend to look more like private schools in terms of results than they look like the public school system as a whole. People are willing to lose the deposits they made to private schools if their child is accepted into one of those public schools. But the district doesn’t get to pick and chose its students- it must educate every child within its boundaries who wants a public education- even, in fact, if it ends up paying tuition at a private school for a child with special needs. Private schools have no such obligation to educate any child, and a child could be rejected by every private school. I know of more than one child who ended up in a public high school because they weren’t accepted by any of the private high schools they applied to (even the one that takes almost anyone), a couple who ended up in public elementary schools because they were expelled from a couple of parochial schools, and even two who were expelled because of their mother’s behavior.
In theory, I like the idea of eliminating the concept of school funding based on revenues from only the local community. I’m not certain only because that’s currently an issue in NYC- NYC claims the state is not giving the city its fair share of education funding. Not sure if the claim is based on the number of students or the amount NYC sends to the state government or something else.
What is their per pupil spending? I couldn’t find it.
Is this a serious question? If so, I’ll answer it. Imagine a school district where there are only 50 children who all live up to 60 miles apart from a centrally located school. Now imagine a school district where there are only 50 children who can walk to school.
Is per-pupil spending going to be the same in each case?
Good in theory, but it often sucks in practice. Oregon recently (I think within the last 10 years) did that. My dad served on the school board of my hometown before and after the change. The problem is that the people appointed to manage the money didn’t do a very good job. How could they? They didn’t live in our community, and they had no idea what our students actually need, money-wise.
I don’t have the stats with me, but I don’t think there is one school district in Oregon that has actally benifited from this program. I know that in my hometown every program from the arts to physics has suffered.
As for the article, the main point was that the school doesn’t matter half as much as parent involvement. When there are horrible schools, and the parents get involved, the schools improve (which drives up housing prices, which forces low-income families to move to worse schools, etc).
Well, not really- the District still has to accept every student. What you have shown is some can accept extra students.
As doreen pointed out, in a few areas there are some few “public” schools that can pick & choose as to who gets in- and they are every bit as successful as private schools
There is nothing magic which makes Private schools better than Public shool in terms of the curriculum they offer. Most actually offer a worse curriculum, as there is a certain amount of prayer/bible studies in the religious one (the great majority), and many of them don’t teach Evolution correctly.
What is special is that they don’t have to take the really bad students, the one with learning disabilities, etc. AND- here’s the big thing- they get the students with parents who care about their kids education.
When you have public schools that also get the same selection of students- they do just as well.
And here’s the problem with the “no child left behind”- the ones in the Public schools have to take a test, and if a certain number don’t pass it- the school gets less funding, etc. So- why not the same for Private schools who want vouchers? Have THEIR students take the exact same damn test, and if the school doesn’t get a passing grade- then they are not eligibale for vouchers.
I don’t see how that argument applies to the good ideal that government and religion should be separated.
This argument either. 
Would you support needs-based government-funded scholarships to primary and secondary schools?
We conservatives have an analogy that I reduced Toyota’s budget because I bought a Hyundai. I can’t imagine that vouchers would be redeemable by schools who refuse special needs children. Perhaps if the idea can be proven that the punks and scum left behind in our failing public schools are creating an unfair cost burden on the government schools, the vouchers can be worth more for those schools.
It just seems important to get students out of schools which are mismanaged and failing. I’m not convinced that reforms to the current system have worked. If there are any new plans to reform, I’d like to hear them.
_
_
Oh?
Private schools who take vouchers ***will not * ** be able to refuse any student without cause?
I missed the part of your post where you were only asking those who objection was that vouchers violates church/state separation. Thought you were simply asking the difference between vouchers that can be used at private religious schools and fianancial aid that can be used at private religious schools.
Not a problem at all- as long as the money doesn’t come diectly from the public school budgets on an $x of dollars per vouchers basis. I don’t have a problem if the district loses enough students to close a school and therefore doesn’t need the funds to operate that school. But there simply is no way to predict in advance that a school will save $x per voucher without knowing how the students getting te voucher will be distributed, And if students currently attending private schools get vouchers, it may end up costing more than it does now.
You can’t imagine that vouchers would be redeemable by schools that won’t take special needs children? I sure can. What are you going to require, that every private school that wants to accept vouchers be able to accomodate every sort of disability? Every public school district can’t accomodate every disability in its own schools- that’s why my coworker’s daughter attends a boarding school in Maine , paid for by the city of New York. She sure wouldn’t benefit by getting a voucher- right now the school district is paying the full cost. And her daughter is (and others like her) is counted when per pupil costs are calculated. Even if private schools must accept special ed needs students, will the school be required to provide special ed services? Don’t laugh, according to this page 8 of this report http://www.cato.org/pubs/briefs/bp81.pdf , although only special ed students are eligible for McKay scholarships, they cannot force the private school to provide any special ed services.
And what other requirements will private schools have to accept to be eligible to redeem vouchers? Will they have to take every student who lives within certain boundaries? Will they have to accept students on a first come, first served basis until the classes are full? Will they be able to expell student who are behavior problems or excessively truant, or who simply won’t do the work? Can religious schools reject potential students of a different religion?Will we end up in a situation where the “private” schools that accept vouchers are no diferent from the current public schools, except for the account name on the teachers paychecks? I mean, if they have to follow the same rules about who to accept and get most of their money from the government, why in the world would they do better? Same parents, same kids, probably the same teachers.
_
_
[/QUOTE]
I don’t think anyone noticed, but I brought up one such reform way earlier in the thread. I wrote a paper last semester about Schools-Within-Schools, and I think it’s a pretty snappy idea. SWS involves breaking onle large school into two or more smaller, more focused schools contained in the same building. Class sizes are sometimes smaller, but the effect is positive regardless of this.
I really don’t think it would be a good idea to C&P my whole paper here, but I will gladly forward it to anyone who asks. Just email me at my screen name at yahoo dot com. Being an undergrad paper, it is, of course, just a summation of other people’s work with my opinion interjected. I think my references make it worth reading to anyone interested in this topic, though.
Plus, when I’m a famous Education researcher in 10 years, you’ll be able to say, “Hey! I read one of his papers before he was famous!” 
Given the fact that per-pupil costs are generally highest in urban core areas, I dismissed this effect as obviously minor – I should have made that explicit.
- I have seen nothing that restricts Vouchers goin to schools that refuse 'special needs" children. So, although you “can’t imagine it”- that seems to be the case.
2.The schools are (in general)* not “mismanaged and failing”- it’s the parents and the students themselves. Private Schools (in general)* and especially Parochial Schools- aren’t “better” than Public schools. They just get kids who have parents who care- which is very very important. And, they don’t have to accept the troublemakers, the 'slow" and the learning disabled. Fewere disruptive kids- bettter leanring environment. But we can’t just say “hey, your kid is disruptive or learning disabled- he doesn’t have a place in the Public School system.”
Now, going to doreen’s post- yes- not even Public Schools are expected to handle those with extreme learning disabilities. I am not talking abouy that very small %- just those with "mild to moderate’ learning and social disabilities.
*Note the “(in general)”- there are a few School Districts (even here) which are corrupt and mismanaged. And, there are a few Private Schools which are indeed heads above the rest- those are rare, oftimes cater to 'exceptional children" and are rarely religous.
You are completely missing the point. Students are stuck in the school district where they live. If they live in a poor area with a bad tax base then their schools will probably suck. If they live in a rich district then their schools will tend to be good. I don’t see how a society can tolerate that kind of inequality. Vouchers are one way to address that issue.
I helped start a private school. We had a budget per-student less than the public school system and our kids did great. The teachers and parents were mostly a bunch of old hippies, so we taught evolution just fine thank you. We also accepted children with learning and physical difficulties and this worked out well for everyone.
We attracted better teachers because we did not have the mind-numbing bueraucracy (sp) and pettiness associated with the public school system. At the same time, we had to meet certain state requirements as to curriculuum and other policies.
We ultimately folded because it was hard for parents to come up with the tuition. Vouchers would have been a life saver.
Increasing funding for poor schools is another way, one that has already been time-tested with proven results, and doesn’t require any new infrastructure or process. Yet the voucher folks never support that proposal. Wonder why?
I think the primary argument of the voucher folks is that we should be spending education money efficiently, not spending more. If that involves balancing the funding between rich and poor schools, then do that first, before wasting more money on a system that is demonstratibly not working.
I do. I vote for every levy that comes my way.
Sure, vouchers will help private schools to survive, and help some parents use them. But the fact that your private school had a per-student budget less than the public school system really doesn’t mean much at all. Did you provide all of the services that a public school system does? You say you accepted children with learning and physical difficulties, but how many and how severe? Probably no where near the severity and percentage that the public school system has to accept. The proper comparision to the private schools’ cost per student is not to the average cost per pupil in the public school system, but to the cost per average student for the same services provided by private schools. How much does it cost to educate the *average student * - one who does not need any special services- in a public school? Somehow, I never see that figure, but I bet it’s a lot closer to the private school’s cost than to the public school average which includes the most expensive students. Same thing for the results, although the separation would be a bit harder. What are the results for public school students whose parents actually care if their kids are educated, who get involved, who make their children go to school unless the kid’s sick? I went to a public high school. In many ways, I think I got a better education that my kids are getting in their private high schools. It looked terrible on paper- low graduation rate, low test scores etc. But if that school was able to do what my kids high schools do, it would have looked a lot better. My kids’ high schools don’t leave anyone back- you fail a subject or two, you make it up in summer school or you don’t come back. You fail more than two subjects, you just plain don’t come back.Therefore, everyone graduates in four years. You’re absent too often, or are a behavior problem, or don’t do your work, you’re gone. You aren’t fluent enough in English to do well on standardized tests, then you never got in because admissions are based on a standardized test. The kids who aren’t there can’t lower the test scores or graduation rate.My kids don’t go to private schools because I believe the actual education is better, or the teachers are better. They go to private schools because private schools don’t tolerate the behavior that public schools must.
As doreen says, public schools are required by law to handle those with extreme learning disabilities, including kids who are so brain-damaged that they will never be able to read or count, as well as kids who are so disabled that they will never be able to feed themselves or grasp a pencil. School districts spend a lot of money on full-time aides and specialized transportation.
DanBlather, Kimstu once posted an interesting story about trying to start a private school, or at least looking into the possiblity. I wonder how that experience compared with yours. And if you have a moment, would you mind answering a question inspired by this thread?
Assumption not proven.
See this is why the vouchers have any chance at all. The Private school dudes casually toss around stuff like this; and stuff like the assumption that private schools give a better education. Neither is nessesarily true.
The two systems aren’t playing by the same rules at all- we are indeed comparing apples and oranges.
For example- if Public school studens do do well on this new test- the school “fails” and some students are eligible for vouchers. But do the private schools have to take the same test in order to recieve those vouchers? No! So- the new law actually simply widens the gap between the two systems, as public schools have to waste a great amount of time prepping their students for a test which is meaningless other than for the “No child left behind” act.
America’s schools are doing well. Not as well as some small nations are doing, sure. But we can’t. That’s because America has so many students & schools systems, that it more or less nessesarily defines the average. Other (small) nations also don’t have the cultural, poverty or crime problems that we have as a large democracy. You just can’t compare America to (say) Iceland, and say “look how horrible America is doing!” That’s a meaningless comparison.