Why would we exempt Amish kids, but not Baptists or Mormons or Muslims?
The Amish have a clear, unwavering historical record to point to for why they would not want their kids in modern public school. Can Baptists or Mormons or Muslims say the same?
Personally I think it would be better to create public schools in the Amish community that meet their requirements (insofar as no technology…there would be no religious teaching at the school).
For taking one small action that, in the aggregate, leads to resegregation of schools, damning a generation of African American school children to a subpar education that will act as an anchor on their dreams for the rest of their lives? You bet your sweet bippy I blame those parents.
If your local school ain’t up to standards, get involved. Make it better. Don’t go for the white supremacist resegregationist solution.
I think there are a number of ways they can make the case that there is. The kerfuffle over transgendered students and locker rooms over the last few years certainly caused some to perk up and take notice.
Shrug Your reasons why this might be good are vastly outweighed by reasons why this might be bad. If my local school were even remotely like this:
I’d give a hearty “fuck that” and move, and wouldn’t feel the least bit bothered about what some internet SJWs had to say about it. There’s no way in hell I’d subject my kid to that if I had a choice about the matter. Lucky for me, and my kid, I do.
Sure, you have a choice in the matter; and I have a choice to condemn folks who contribute to resegregation.
nm
I don’t think it’s possible for any one family to make every local school better by themselves, no matter how involved they are. If all that effort spent could be directed toward their own children in a more successful school district, public or private, the rational choice is to do so - leave and don’t look back.
A kid is in the public school system for a short time. Doing the best by your kids sometimes means removing them from sub optimal environments. There is no virtue sacrificing your children on the altar of failing public school ideology.
I understand the desire to do what is the best for you without regard to any others in the world.
However, as a voter you can make a difference even if it isn’t addressing a system you yourself are using.
Let’s remember that we’re talking not just about our kids, but about the people with whom our kids will live, those we will pay to support for life should they fail, those who could be a net asset to America - or not.
Even if someone were to have no concept of morality or ethics, it seems like a mistake to support the failure of significant portions of our population.
Just because you eliminate a market in the private sector does not make it dictatorial.
If we made all private prisons, public prisons, would that be dictatorial?
If we eliminated private health insurance companis and provided public healthcare to all our citizens, would that be dictatorial?
If you don’t want to eliminate these things, then do you want to just continue allowing the system to be shit? So long as healthcare, criminal justice, and low level education is made profitable, there will undoubtedly be INTERESTS to increase profits, consequently at the expense of our people.
I don’t remotely see it as a “sacrifice.” I see it as teaching your kids different lessons. If you don’t think the school is good enough for your kids, you also don’t think it’s good enough for your neighbors’ kids, and you should band together to change that, not abandon your neighbors to their fate.
Yes. So, work to make that school better before your kid gets there.
And, don’t stop just because your kid graduated - or in the case that you don’t actually have a kid.
Putting ones kid in private school is not an excuse for perpetuating underachievement in the local public education system.
I’d certainly consider it dictatorial if you told them private doctors are now illegal. Likewise, the idea that we’re going to make home-schooling, as an alternative to a rather broken public education system, illegal, strikes me as disturbingly authoritarian nanny-statism.
IDGAF about the profits. I care about the parents being free to choose for themselves how they’d like their children to be educated.
Too bad for them. This is the same as saying they don’t want their kids around black people. Not sure they can convince a court that their deeply held religious principles are at play here.
This strikes me as a much more reasonable approach. If I might paraphrase: 'hey, HD, I don’t want your kid to go to a shitty public school either. In fact, I don’t want anyone’s kid to go to a shitty public school. Can we join together in finding ways to make public school better (or perhaps find workable alternatives) so that everyone has a chance at a decent education?"
Yeah, I’m on board with that concept, assuming it doesn’t result in harm to me or my child. I can’t guarantee that we’ll agree on the best method to achieve that, or how much priority to give it over other pressing needs, but I think it’s a worthy goal, and one that I share.
You are clearly answering a different point than the poster you responded to raised. The poster said private schools provide better education to students in private schools than public schools provide to students in public schools. Or anyway that’s the obvious inference. I don’t know if that’s provable or not. Even if a given school’s students perform better on standardized tests etc it always leaves the question mainly whether one school has simply better students (due to their innate talents, socialization, home life etc). That’s a huge issue in such measurements though can be an uncomfortable one to discuss. Secondarily, people can quibble whether standardized tests accurately reflect how well someone has been educated but that consideration pales compared to the first IMO.
Anyway you answered a pretty different point, saying that charter (it seems, not private necessarily) schools hurt public schools. That’s plausible, but tends to be beside the point for parents choosing one or the other, or voter/parents deciding if they will support charter schools as a policy. OTOH it’s true that charter schools use public money, in fact it’s questionable to call them ‘private schools’. Charter school policy is about providing publicly funded competition to ‘regular’ public schools. It’s a somewhat different and more recent debate than whether private schools should be allowed (answer: it would be pretty totalitarian to prohibit them). A third theme would be voucher policies which potentially steer public money to outright private schools. It’s reasonable that that is controversial, though I’m not sure it’s obviously a bad policy if purely prioritizing student interest, not public school teacher interest.
iirc the tax bill provided further aid to those who enroll their kids in private schools.
This isn’t about just funding, but I do have evidence that lack of funding for schools generally leads to inferior education and educational environments. I know for a fact having a clean healthy environment contributes tremendously to the academic performance of a child.
If I’m a politician or what have you and I want to increase funding to schools, I don’t just hand it all over to the school board or whoever decides how to spend that money. I go in and make damn sure the money is being spent on increasing wages for everyone not just the top, and improving the instructional integrity of the school buildings.
With so many right wingers willing to spend billions arming and training teachers for what they believe to be security reasons, then why can’t we throw a couple million at different school districts? Does the fact corruption, or rather the person in charge of the money gives more to himself than the people below him, invalidate the concept of increasing school wages? Should we just allow our public schools ot continue failing, and lose potential trillions of dollars because we have a population of dimwitted Neanderthals who don’t know basic mathematics?
It’s in your best interest and my best interest to keep as many people educated as possible. IIRC Finland has no private option, their schools are all public. The way their educational system works, it seems children aren’t just filling out tons of tests, they’re actually learning something. Maybe I’m just a crazy progressive, but I honestly believe every child despite cultural or ideological background can potentially be brilliant under the right kind of environment. The current environment we have in America is absolutely terrible. With already failing infrastructure and lack of increased wages for decades, we have millions of people fail school, and many of which don’t become self taught programmers and rival those with degrees, not everyone is that lucky.
We have to invest in the baker, not the dough.
Finland would disagree.
It’s about theory versus practice here. In theory that would work but when put into practice, the money was always used to make the outside of the school better, or new lockers…not where it counted. I wish it had worked.
I had a choice between that high school and two others known for trouble, in fact I’ve heard worse things about the alternate two in my district. I had to lie about my address just to get in the one I was in. My grades weren’t even that bad either. It was just a shitty situation all around but I went through it. Never could blame my parents about it, they did the best they could and helped me and wanted to put me somewhere else but it just wasn’t feasible for a number of reasons. I just learned to get along with every group, had to be friends with gangs and shit to make sure I was safe though and that shouldn’t be a requirement to go to school.
and why is that?