IIRC, in Ontario you designate on your property tax form whether you want your tax money to go to the public or seperate (Catholic) school board. Catholic schools are not private schools; they are still publicly funded, and you do not have to pay extra to go there.
bashere & mountainmain schools are funded on a per pupil basis as based on enrollment. So here’s essentially how it works:
Stuffinb High School(hey it could happen) has 500 students.
Funding is $8000x500
Total funding 4,000,000
Under vouchers lets say 1/5th (pulled completely out of thin air) took the voucher
Funding is now $8000x400
Total funding 3,200,000
That’s the way the vouchers are written, so yes it takes some students from the school system maybe but it takes significantly more form the school than it gives to vouchers.
Also, and Im using California estimates, now this doesn’t even cout the “big hit” See, the above only counts towards future enrollees to the private schools but doesn’t even take into account 40,000,000 already spent by those already attending private schools in California if the voucher initiative passes.
I had attended both public and private schools in the area that I ended up living when I had my kids. I had a pretty good idea which schools were producing and which weren’t. I read several books on two particular schools that appealed to me: Montessori and Carden (May Carden)
I chose Carden as it was more structured in the classroom. My stepson was attending Santa Monica High School and was doing pretty well so he stayed. When my 5 year old was old enough I discovered a Carden school was opening very close to home.
My girl was “hyper” but this was before hyper was a problem so we just considered her a pain in the ass. She was accepted anyway and she loved it! She stayed all the way through and graduated with honors.
The kids were multi-ethnic which is par for the course in California, and liked this. I have no belief in God but I felt a little Christian training wouldn’t hurt her and would be handy when I worked crossword puzzles. She graduated with a solid love for Shakespeare, classical art and music.
I did my weeding out by talking to parents of other schools and checking with UCLA regarding the qualifications of the schools and what I could afford. Carden fit the bill in all cases.
I joined the Mother’s club and was instrumental in getting uniforms on the kids basically to stop the arguments in the morning about what they would wear.
I didn’t look for a school that took handicapped kids they simply applied and were accepted. I lived very close to the school and would head over to help the kids with lunch and potty breaks.
Many of the kids were from the Hollywood crowd and started bringing in extra money for teachers helpers so more “challenged” kids could enter the school. When you have a good product, the money will happen.
My second daughter was now 5 and was looking forward to school too. She was dumb! Oh she could talk, she just couldn’t think. They decided to give her a chance because she was a really nice kid. The teachers were kind and did what they could.
In third grade she woke up!! and led the school in academics until she left. This may not have been possible in public school.
This dumb kid is now an estate planner and an expert on insurance fraud. She wrote 2 bills for the senate earier this year and had both passed. She moved to Bethesda to work more closely with the house/senate.
I owe a lot to that school. My grandkids are in Catholic schools and I’m not sure they are getting as good an education as my two. But that is not my business or my choice.
I am beginning to think that k thru 12 are training sessions to teach the kids how to learn. My kids found their real educations in the U.C. system. They got in because of excellent grades in the lower schools so in the long run I guess it worked. They were discliplined just the way I wanted. Kind and considerate but don’t push them around too much. I taught them how to be first class bitches.
We all have our legacies.
I’m still missing something, stuffinB. Bear with me; I’m slow today.
If, instead of spending 8,000, the local government spends 4,000 and gets the same results (one educated pupil), then the government is ahead 4000, right? It has transfered to cost to the individual parents of the students, but it is ahead. Is there any reason to believe that this money would go to somewhere other than schools?
Now, I concede that to break even, then there must be an additional (if I read your number correctly ) 10,000 students who would have gone to public school, but who instead go to a private school. That does not strike me as an unreachable number.
RE: competition
From MSN Encarta: com·pe·ti·tion [kòmp tísh’n ] (plural com·pe·ti·tions) noun
-
trying to beat others: the activity of doing something with the goal of outperforming others or winning something several firms are in competition for the contract
-
contest: an activity in which people try to do something better than others or win something
-
opposition: those against whom one is competing, or the level of opposition they give keep one step ahead of the competition
-
ECOLOGY struggle for resources: the struggle between organisms of the same or different species for limited resources such as food or light
Notice the above?
Competition implies winners and losers. All fine and good if you’re talking about whether the Niners will beat St. Louis. Just dandy if we’re saying Boeing is in competition Raytheon for an aircraft contract. However we’re not talking generalities, we’re discussing the futures of children. Do we really want to subject kids to “market forces”. How do we explain to Johnnie and Susie Public (schools) that we’re sorry you can’t get an education, your school was just not competitive?
Are we that cynical now?
The problem here is that an awful lot of Johnnies and Suzies out there are basicallly getting this message. THe product many, many, of our schools are offering is clearly inferior to the product offered by the educatiopn systems of other countiries nad by many private schools.
Personaly, I alike the idea of voucher programs beiong made avalible to students in “at-risk” areas–students who attend schools that are demonstrably failing to offer a quality education (here in Alabama we call it being “on alert”–basically any school whose scores go down and stay down). It is not right to tell a child his only educational opputunity is a school that is known to not provide an education, but that it will be better in ten years. Johnny and Suzie are having thier lives ruined NOW.
That’s always been my understanding, too. I get the feeling the people who support the vouchers don’t actually know how they would work.
**
Doh! I hadn’t even thought of that. Good point.
My parents were both school teachers all their lives - public school teachers - so my perspective essentially comes from theirs. No one is getting rich teaching in a public school. My mother wanted more funding for the school because that would allow her to have a smaller class size and focus on teaching the kids how to read instead of trying to control a huge number of kids. I can’t ever remember her wishing she personally made more money, just that the classes would be smaller.
And you now what? They’re retired now, and they still think vouchers are a stupid idea.
Manda I think your arguements about schools elsewhere were debunked in a previous thread, and the private ones in this one, but I’ll take a look around, if not, I’ll provide some evidence myself.
As for the rest of what you said, I agree with you. But in many places that’s already available. There ARE programs in place to help underperforming schools, there are also publicly funded charter schools. I see nothing wrong with expanding efforts like those.
But vouchers do nothing to address those concerns.
You take the typical public school student, and give him a voucher, it does no good if there’s a waiting list to get into a good school.
It does no good if he’s rejected by the admission panel.
It does no good if there are not private schools in his area.
Sure some schoools might spring up to take advantage of the money, but how long is that going to take.
Oh and where will the rest of the money for his tuition come from?
And here’s another thing about failing schools. You know how we know their failing? Because there’s accountability. Know something else, that’s usually based on test scores. Know whats wrong with the numbers you get for test scores? The schools scores are done as an average of the total student body scores. Yet people still come out of those schools able to attend college.
Let’s not kid ourselves, not every kid in the classroom is taking the opportunity to learn. Hell not every student is even making it to class on a regular basis. Why? It’s not just the schools, it takes commitment from not just the schoool, but the parents and community as well.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by DavisMcDavis *
**
That’s always been my understanding, too. I get the feeling the people who support the vouchers don’t actually know how they would work.
I get the feeling that the same can be said for those who oppose them, too.
Every thing I’ve ever read suggests that we start with a certain amount of money, divide it by the number of students, and then give that to schools on the “per student” basis. If any one can provide me with a link that suggests that we decide how much money is required to educate students, multiple that by the number of students, and then give that out to schools, and I’ll go read it.
Not that I agree that schools are funded based on enrollment. That does not, however, imply that removing students, with out reducing the tax base, will necessarily reduce the amount of money going to schools.
That’s like saying “What if the money you pay to educate society’s children was on top of the money you pay to educate society’s children?” Answer: You’ll be paying a heck of a lot more.
And that is essentially what you’re getting with vouchers. Remember, we aren’t privatizing the public education system (which is perhaps the only way this flawed idea could work effectively, but even then I’d be skeptical).
An exodus of kids from an underperforming public school won’t make that school go away. In a rural area such as where I live, there’s no way in hell the public school is going away.
And what of the kids who are deemed unworthy of any of the local private-school options, or there just isn’t enough room for them elsewhere locally?
“Build more private schools,” you may say. Who’s going to be building them? Vouchers don’t address this question at all. Do you think this will really be that profitable of an endeavor, that little private academies will be popping up all over the place?
No; those “left-behind” kids will be staying right there in the public school system, which will still have all of its overhead costs and much less of its per-pupil money. It will make a bad situation much worse.
Another consideration - The likely goal of most people favoring vouchers is to get more one-to-one teacher-student time for their child, and more specialized education in either their special needs (learning disorder; discipline) or exceptional aptitudes (art, music, science, math, etc.).
Attaining such goals is extremely expensive.
In a nearby county, they had a very successful education/day treatment program that concentrated on the worst-learning, most incorrigible kids, the ones the local schools had basically given up on.
This program had an outstanding record of success for turning these kids around, primarily through lots of one-to-one interaction, and designing curriculum around each kid’s interests and abilities.
Despite its results, the program was scrapped last year, because it cost way too much money and could serve too few children at a time while remaining effective.
There’s been a big push in recent years in Michigan for the formation of charter schools. These are essentially public schools that don’t have to play by the same rules as more conventional public schools but still get the money.
Many are complaining now about the lack of accountability, the nebulous nature of some of these schools’ educational goals, their lack of testing, etc. I’ve had local superintendents tell me that students that attend these schools and then have come back to the traditional school setting are frequently farther behind educationally than other kids their age/grade level.
The problems with underperforming schools need to be a priority, but vouchers are not, IMO, the solution. I personally think good places to start would be shit-canning teacher tenure; and making it next to impossible to criminally or civilly go after teachers and school administrators for disciplining students in an effort to maintain order in their classrooms.
But Manda - here’s the deal - the voucher doesn’t actually cover the cost of private school. So now what? You’ve sent a few kids - the ones with enough money to make up the difference - to private school, and left the other kids behind in a school with even less funding than before.
Plus, you’re giving additional money to those students who were already IN private school on their own before the vouchers. Where is that money coming from?
You’re missing the fact that there’s an additional $4,000 going out to each of the students already in private schools who weren’t receiving anything before.
Also, when you look at an individual school, losing a student means you lose $8,000. At the level of the individual school, I don’t see how that would ever mean you could come out ahead. Unless the voucher plan includes a provision whereby the $4,000 extra goes to the public school (and how much you want to bet it doesn’t?) then all you’re left with is a smaller student body with less funding. Which is neither here nor there, but certainly isn’t an improvement for the students who are still stuck there, holding a $4,000 voucher for an $8,000 school, with two dollar and fiddy cent in their pocket and no job.
It also fails to take into account the fact that family sizes differ. If it’s “unfair” to pay for both public & private schools, isn’t it also “unfair” to be taxed the same for one child at school as five? Some neighbors of mine have 4 kids at Catholic school - would they get 4 vouchers? That’d kind of destroy the “fairness” element.
Furthermore, does anyone know of any studies looking at the effect of vouchers on private school costs? Having taught at a private school (and taught economics to boot), it would appear to me that schools are most likely to eat up the value of the voucher with an increase in fees, thus maintaining their exclusivity. Given the existance of waiting lists, it appears the private school system is running at or near capacity at the moment. Even if vouchers lead to an increase in the number of private schools, that will take time, and will result in short term fee increases at the very least.
Established private schools will be able to raise their fees, allowing them to spend more, perhaps boosting salaries for teachers, leading to a further drain on the ability of public schools to compete. Therefore the poorer children, who are meant to be helped by vouchers, will be stuck in a state school system that is in a worst situation, both in the sense of absolute funding levels and ability to compete for teachers.
Can’t really see the benefit there, but that’s just me, I suppose.
The government may not be ahead at all.I believe the $8000 is the average cost per pupil ( total expenses divided by the number of pupils) That is not necessarily ( and probably isn’t ) the same as the cost per average pupil ( that is, one with no physical handicaps who does not need any special education services}.If the voucher given to an average pupil is worth $4000, and the cost per average pupil is $3000, the public school is behind $1000. (The difference between the $8000 and the $3000 is due to the sometimes very high costs of educating children with special needs)Even if the cost per average pupil is $4000, the public school can end up behind, due to fixed costs, if only a small number of students leave.And where the public schools really lose money is in the plans like one that was proposed in NY, where my kids would be eligible for vouchers worth $3000 each even though the public school system is not currently spending a dime on them ( they go to private school)
doreen,
very good point, and one I had not considered. I’m becoming more and more suspicious of this 8,000 number, anyway, since the number varies so much from district to district. I’m trying to find real spending numbers- I’ll be back when I do.
Actually, bashere,the $8000 figure may not be far off base. It’s just about that in NYC.Also,if the public school sytem cannot itself provide an appropriate education for a severely handicapped child, it must pay for a private school that can, regardless of its cost ( saw something on 60 minutes once about one of these special schools with a very high cost where the public school systems ( students came from different parts of the state) had to pay not only the tuition, but also in some cases for air transportation to the school and back so the students could go home on weekends)
Also, as someone who attended parochial school, I can tell you that private schools eat up money like candy. They’re always wanting for more and more money. So it isn’t like they have better resources.
Trust me.
You people disgust me. “The really poor people won’t be helped!” you whine. So the rich and middle class don’t deserve to be helped? Standards of fairness only apply to the poor? Look, our society provides universal education. Clearly, our society believes that having universal education is beneficial to society. Otherwise society wouldn’t pay for it. So if rich people pay for the education of their children by themselves, are they not providing a service to society? What’s wrong with reimbursing at least some of the cost? You people seem to think that vouchers just give free money to the rich. No, they just make the rich have to pay less. Are the rich such horrible people that we must soak them for all we can?
DavisMcDavis asks
From the parents of those very same students. Duh. Under the our current system, we just pocket the savings from them, and pretend that it is somehow “our” money. When people propose voucher systems to give the money back, other people claim that we’re giving “our” money to the rich. No, we’re not giving them “our” money, we’re giving them their money.
Now, there have been some good points against vouchers. The ladck of standards is troubling; if we’re going to pay people to provide a service, we should make sure it actually gets done. And we need to be careful to make the voucher amount based upon what it costs to educate a normal student, not the average cost. But these complaints are directed against specific voucher plans, and do not constitute an argument against the idea of vouchers in general.
And complaining about the fact that funding is purely per capum is silly. That’s not the fault of vouchers; that’s the fault of the school funding system.
You and I live in Straightdopeland. The citizens of Straightdopeland have discoverd that it is advantageous to all to build a park dedicated to Cecil Adams. This park would bring many benfits, both immediate and in the future. I however, think the wrong class of people inhabit the park and find the facilities too run down for my liking. Instead of spending my Sundays in the park, I spend them at Dear Abby’s Land-o-Fun, with a thirty-two dollar admission price.
I dont like paying thirty two dollars every Sunday, so I propose park vouchers that would give people thirteen dollars a week to spend at the park of their choice, nevermind the fact that thirteen dollars alone wont get you into any park, exept the public park.
Now, does it make sense to publicly subsidize my choice to go to Dear Abby’s Land-o-Fun, especially at the expense of Cecil Adams Public Park? Even if less people go to Cecil Adams Public Park it still costs the same amount of money to mow the lawn, plant flowers and clean out the koi pomd.
Does it make sense for public funding to go to Dear Abby’s Land-o-Fun, even when it doesnt have to meet state set safty standards? Does it make sense to publically fund them when they can and will make unsafe rides in order to attract more customers to their “choice”?
No. It doesnt. You can opt out if you want to, but I’m not going to pay for it with my money and the death of my public park. I’m sorry. I have no sympathy for those that CHOOSE to abandon the system. If you dont like things how they are, opt out of it. But we do not have to subsidize your choice.
I understand that the stakes are a lot higher in schools. Lets remember what is best for ALL children, not just our pucket book.
I think the problem is that the money has to come from somewhere. At the moment, the public education budget is $x. If we take $y and give it to people whose children go to private schools, then those people are better off by y and the people still attending public schools are worse off by the same amount, other things being equal. The new public school budget is (x-y), out of which they still have to cover the same level of fixed costs. So it doesn’t “just make the rich have to pay less”. Even without the external effects I mentioned before it leads to lower availability of financing per child left behind.
What you’re proposing is reducing the benefits available to poorer children, in exchange for money back in the pockets of the better off. People may want to justify that. But I wish they’d have the honesty to propose tax & benefit cuts rather than hiding behind a voucher scheme.
There are arguments to be made for vouchers, though IMHO,I find them unpersuasive. Your’s just isn’t one of them.
A big problem with vouchers is seldom thought of by people who live in urban and suburban areas. In rural areas (such as where I grew up), you’re not going to have other schools pop to use voucher money. You’re not going to be able totransfer to another public school. If both parents work (or if the only parent works), you’re not going to be able to home-school. So you had better make sure that the public schools do a good job.
First step? Get school boards and state legislatures out of the business of micro-managing schools. They don’t know how to teach, but they tell teachers how it should be done.
Sure. And let’s also set up a board of duly elected citizens to tell doctors what medicines to prescribe.