Vouchers: Uneven Competition?

Great Debates
21

Vouchers may not be the answer, but it’s one way for parents to voice their disapproooval about the state of public schools and public education. Somewhere, we obvioiusly took a wrong turn if kids can’t read when they leave high school, or they have no idea What a Fedral Republic is. The point of public SCHOOLS is to teach what we all agree should be a common base of knowledge. Not, as Makhazzio said, a place to socialize. Hey, I enjoyed recess as much as any kid, maybe more. But my teachers first made sure I could count my change from the lunch lady.

I know that vouchers will mean less money for public schools, and at the same time represent half, or less, of what a parent would need to pay for private school, but it may be a wake up call for the lousy beaurocrats who are holding this country hostage with their constant barrage of regulations making it impossible to teach. Also, the kind of crap they choose for subjects is digusting sometimes, but I’ll leave that alone.

My son goes to a private school, with no religious affiliations or teachings, and he has since first grade. Even though it is no problem paying the tuition today, it was quite a challenge a few years ago, but definately worth every nickel. The public schools around here are pushing kids through who probably don’t have the education by eight grade that he has received by fifth. So why not give some more kids a chance? Why not try something to get schools back to teaching and actually try to stop some of the violence, drug dealing, and other non-sence that goes on?

If not vouchers, please, propose something better. Require a school to have passing math and english grades before they can allow sports. Require students to pass history tests before they can take film ed. You know, just a tiny bit of common sence.

And for those who have said that parents need to be involved and work to improve the schools - amen. But please note that in many districts parental involvement is not well tolerated - the attitude is ‘Hey, we’re the pros, let us run it the way we see fit’. Yeah, I’ve seen how fit you are, and how badly you’ve screwed up already.

Sorry, sounds more like a rant than a debate. Here are a few (hopefully cogent) points:

  1. (many) Public schools can use an overhaul, let’s get started.

  2. If vouchers are not the way to go, propose other solutions, rather than just throwing more money at the problem. Some examples above.

22

You are SOOOOO wrong here, Sam- and that is one of the biggest problems with Bushes program. It does NOT penalize FAILING schools- it penalizes schools that “fail to improve”. In other words- if a public shool is already doing so well- there is no real room for improvement (and a lot of public schools in very weathly districts are doing that well), it will be penalized as “failing”. How does that make sense, guys?

Next- the schools who are doing the worse- (in CA, anyway) are "forced’ to take large numbers of students who do not understand English. The Tests are in English- thus those who do not speak it- fail. And private schools, in general won’t take these kids. The other schools who are doing badly- are in the inner city- with all sorts of very poor & problem kids- who do not care, and their parents do not care. How will vouchers help here?

Cledet- so you" pay taxes & get bad schools" so you want your money back. Well, lady- there are LOTS of folks, like me- who have no kids, and have to pay taxes so that YOUR kids get an education. So- if I am going to pay so that some other folks kids get an education- I want those kids getting an education that will teach Evolution- not Creation.

Next- who says Private schools do better than Public Schools? Since out here thay are not accountable, and take no tests or anything- they may well be doing far worse. Who would know? In any case- what is the correct answer to “how old does the earth appear to be?”. If you kid has just answered “6000 years”- they are not getting a quality education.

tradesilicon- Something better? Get a Board of Education that focuses on just that- “education” instead of PC issues & politics. And the power is in YOUR hands. You can vote in any type of School Board YOU want. Or run yourself. Don’t like your public shcools- have you done something about it? I have.

And there is the final- BIG- problem with giving tax money to private schools. Public shcools are accountable to the voters & taxpayers. Private schools are not. If MY money is going to be spent- I want it spent somewhere that I have a voice- that is accountable to ME. Anything else violates my Constitutiona; rights.

23

I want to see a cite for this assertion, please.

24

A kind of tardy follow-up to minty’s comments about the Milwaukee “school choice” voucher program, that illustrates some of the problems Jackmannii, tourbot, and others have pointed out. A 1999 article notes that a number of Milwaukee schools were being investigated for violation of the admissions and civil liberties requirements stipulated by the voucher program:

Now I can certainly sympathize with the people who run private schools with a religious focus and who don’t want to dilute their religious message by accomodating non-participants. But if they’re gonna take taxpayer money for tuition, they have to comply with the nondiscrimination requirements. This is a fundamental problem with vouchers, as far as I can see: you’re essentially expecting a private school to be able to provide a public education to some of its students, and that’s very difficult to mandate.

And there are not always a lot of other options. CLedet complains, understandably, that it isn’t fair if your choice in publicly funded education is limited to one crappy public school. Well, it’s also not fair if your choice in publicly funded education is limited to one crappy secular public school and two or three better-quality religious schools that will force or pressure your kids into sectarian indoctrination that’s against their or your personal principles.

Moreover, as I always find myself pointing out in voucher debates (having attended both public and private schools and knowing how thin a shoestring the latter often operate on), the chances for obtaining new options are limited by the fact that general education (as opposed to specialized training or test-prep courses, say) is basically not a money-making proposition. Most successful private schools either have pretty sizeable individual endowments or are associated, as has been noted, with a wealthy multinational institution such as the Catholic Church. Even then, they are often kind of squeezed for resources and have to fall back on workarounds like alumni fundraising drives, extracurricular fees, and parent “volunteerism” (like some of those poor schools mentioned in the above article). You just can’t run a private school on tuition revenue alone.

While I applaud the often-heroic teachers and administrators who manage to give private school students decent educations even when the money’s so tight, I don’t think we can expect them to make a huge difference to the quality of our national education at $1500 a head. The public schools aren’t rolling in wealth either, of course; there are still large discriminatory gaps between poor and rich school districts, even as schools are being legally required to handle the (expensive) demands of “mainstreaming” many special-needs students who in the past would basically have been left to fend for themselves or kept in special schools. But the basic public-school mission at least is something most of us can support, and I think improving rather than replacing the underperforming public schools is the better way to go. And as sili points out, if the voucher debate provides the incentive actually to do that, it will have been worth it.

25

Not exactly.
Another goal is to teach a common basis of behavior. A child does not stop learning just because the bell has wrung. Recess teaches lessons of its own.

Just my 2sense
When I refer to my 2sense, I’m actually talking about my weird fifth sense. Not sixth. By some tragic accident, I was born without taste buds.

  • sig courtesy of Surgoshan
26

Kimstu, good post. I can understand why some people would have concerns about vouchers. We have to start somewhere is the biggest reason I support vouchers. I beleive that vouchers, in the present time, should be an option. You do make some valid points. Thanks for the link.

Daniel, go pad your post count elsewhere.

27

Gee, Pld if you just read sams post, you could see the last paragraph of what I quoted “against scholls that are unable or refuse to IMPROVE”. However, in todays SJMercury news thay mention that the standard for failing is “lack of improvement”. See this quote “Students in schools that failed to improve over three years could get federal money…” “specific goals for increasing student performance”. Thus- a school that does not improve is “failing”. Did you read Bushes “package”- what do YOUR cites say are gounds for “failing”?

28

I did read Sam’s post. Did you? It says

See, the schools that “are unable or refuse to improve” have to be the ones that “show a three-year record of failing to meet standards.” The “unable or refuse to improve” doesn’t exist in a vacuum. Schools that already meet standards would not, logically, be expected to improve, and I don’t know why you or any other person would believe otherwise.

Are you talking about this article? Do you think we don’t have search engines, Danny?

Boy oh boy, are those quotes out of context. Read the linked article, folks. Daniel, your ability to lie with a straight face never ceases to amaze me.

Holy Jesus Christ on Toast, Daniel, you are dishonest. The article I link to above in the SJ Mercury News specifically outlines the definition of “failing,” to wit:

–Students would be tested annually in reading and math from the third through eighth grades. Each school would publicly report results ``by race, gender, English language proficiency, disability and socioeconomic status.’’

–If a school has not made adequate progress for two years, the school district must implement corrective action'' and allow students to choose another public school. If there is no progress after the next year, poor students may use federal funds to transfer to a higher performing public or private school’’ or receive private tutoring. Any money used by the student would be taken from the school’s funding.

–In addition to state standards for reading and math, the states would also be required to set ``challenging content standards in history and science.’’

–States or school districts could free themselves from some federal requirements in return for agreeing to specific goals for increasing student performance over five years. There would be economic sanctions for failing to meet those terms.

They have to not be meeting the math and reading standards to be considered “failing.” This is so goddamned obvious and rudimentary, it comes as absolutely no surprise that you do not understand it. If you’re going to expect “improvement,” you have to set a baseline from which to improve. The Bush plan, whatever its merits, does exactly that–sets minimum reading and math standards. It says so in the article you cite, and yet you attempt to misrepresent it. Even the Bush administration could not be stupid enough to present a plan for progress in the schools without defining “progress from what.”

Does it bother you to get caught lying and misusing cites again and again and again and again . . . ?

29

I’m a little paranoid, but this seems to me to be the point of the voucher initiatives. The middle to upper middle class kids will be separated from the poor and otherwise disadvantaged kids whose parents will have no choice but to keep their kids in a public school that is doomed.

In California, at least, there are state licensing requirements for public school teachers but not for private school teachers. (At least not yet)
IMHO, we should fix the public schools, not abandon them.

30

Spooje, I agree that the best solution is to fix public schools. The BIG problem is that its going to take years to fix it. What happens to the children that are in the system now? I think vouchers are an option for the present, not a permanent fix. While some school districts do need more funding, and I will admit that vouchers are more likely to hurt these same districts, I don’t think throwing money at an old Ford Pinto will solve anything. It doesn’t matter how much money is thrown at it, in the end you still have an old Pinto.

31

To lend further weight to the fact that DITWD is a liar, I offer some quotes directly from President Bush’s plan, entitled “No Child Left Behind,” which can be downloaded as a PDF file straight from the White House website.

From page 5:

Accountability and High Standards. States, school districts, and schools must be accountable for ensuring that all students, including disadvantaged students, meet high academic standards. States must develop a system of sanctions and rewards to hold districts and schools
accountable for improving academic achievement.

Annual Academic Assessments. Annual reading and math
assessments will provide parents with the information they need to know how well their child is doing in school, and how well the school is educating their child. Further, annual data is a vital diagnostic tool for schools to achieve continuous improvement. With adequate time for
planning and implementation, each state may select and design assessments of their choosing. In addition, a sample of students in each state will be assessed annually with the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) 4 th and 8 th grade assessment in reading and math.

Consequences for Schools that Fail to Educate Disadvantaged Students. Schools that fail to make adequate yearly progress for disadvantaged students will first receive assistance, and then come under corrective action if they still fail to make progress. If schools fail to make adequate yearly progress for three consecutive years, disadvantaged students may use Title I funds to transfer to a higher-performing public or private school, or receive supplemental educational services from a
provider of choice.
From page 7:

Rewarding Success and Sanctioning Failure:
Rewards for Closing the Achievement Gap. High performing states that narrow the achievement gap and improve overall student achievement will be rewarded.
Accountability Bonus for States. Each state will be offered a one-time bonus if it meets accountability requirements, including establishing annual assessments in grades 3-8, within two years of enacting this plan.
“No Child Left Behind” School Rewards. Successful schools that have made the greatest progress in improving the achievement of disadvantaged students will be recognized and rewarded with “No Child Left Behind” bonuses.
Consequences for Failure. The Secretary of Education will be authorized to reduce federal funds available to a state for administrative expenses if a state fails to meet their performance objectives and demonstrate results in academic achievement.
From page 9:

(Part A: Closing the Achievement Gap for Disadvantaged Students)
Overview

The federal government can, and must, help close the achievement gap between disadvantaged students and their peers. To meet that goal, the federal investment in Title I must be spent more effectively and with greater accountability. This proposal changes current law by
requiring that states, school districts and schools receiving Title I funds ensure that students in all student groups meet high standards. Schools must have clear, measurable goals focused on basic skills and essential knowledge.

Requiring annual state assessments in math and reading in grades 3-8 will ensure that the goals are being met for every child, every year. Annual testing in every grade gives teachers, parents and policymakers the information they need to ensure that children will reach academic success.

Schools that fail to make sufficient progress should receive special assistance. Students should not be forced to attend persistently failing schools, and they must at some point be freed to attend adequate schools. Under this plan, disadvantaged students will not be required to sacrifice their education and future for the sake of preserving the status quo.
Page 10:

Expects Adequate Yearly Progress for Disadvantaged Students. Under current law, districts must determine whether each Title I school is making adequate yearly progress based on whether its students are meeting state
content and performance standards. The status quo does not ensure, however, that disadvantaged students within each school make progress. Under this proposal, a state’s definition of adequate yearly progress must apply specifically to disadvantaged students, as well as to the overall student population. This expectation will serve to hold schools and districts accountable for improving the
performance of disadvantaged students and to help educators, parents and others discern whether achievement gaps are closing.
Page 11:

If the identified school still has not met adequate yearly progress after two years, the district must implement corrective action and offer public school choice to all students in the failing school.

If the school fails to make adequate progress after three years, disadvantaged students within the school may use Title I funds to transfer to a higher performing public or private school, or receive supplemental educational services from a provider of choice. All non-public providers
receiving federal money will be subject to appropriate standards of accountability.

Students may continue to attend a school of choice for the duration of the time they would have attended the failing school. Choice options must continue to be offered until two years after the school is no longer identified as being in need of improvement.
There’s a lot more. I suggest people read it on their own, rather than let DITWD misrepresent it for them.

32

That’s the part of the argument I just can’t see. It’s not like there’s a lot of extra space in private schools, just waiting for kids from the failing schools to move in. And, seconding Kimstu on the general subject of private school economics, anyone who’s expecting more than a gradual expansion of private school capacity is living in a dream world, IMNSHO.

As Kimstu pointed out, private (nonprofit) schools operate on a shoestring. One of the ways they keep things going is by paying their faculty substantially less than what public schools do, and often by giving the faculty greater workloads and out-of-class responsibilities as well. I think it’s a given that there’s no market niche for for-profit private schools.

Private schools are generally founded out of a sense of mission of one sort or another. For instance, many private schools in the South began when the Kennedy and Johnson administrations decided to enforce Brown v. Board of Education. Many evangelical Christian schools have been started up more recently by parents who wanted schools where their children wouldn’t learn about sinful things such as evolution and birth control. It may be that private schools will form to serve the children in failing school districts, but I wouldn’t bet on its happening on the sort of scale needed to make a difference, and it certainly won’t happen very fast.

There’s no reason not to save a small handful of students from those failing schools. But it’s clearly not much of a solution for the short term - and even in the long run, the clear need is to improve the public schools.

In all fairness, Bush’s plan addresses that need to a reasonable extent, and provides money to help failing schools improve, within that three-year window. Money, standards, and the threat of losing students to other schools, taken as a package, may actually add up to something. But if it does, it says here that the key element will be the effect on the public schools, rather than on any hope that substantial numbers of former public-school students will now have a superior private school education.

33

Yes DO read it- and the article. Both clearly state that Schools who do not “make adequate progress” are “failing”. Progress, per Oxford: 2.“advance or developement toward completion, betterment; IMPROVEMENT” (as a verb)2. “advance or develope toward completion, IMPROVEMENT” (emphasis mine).

Note such lines as “progress toward improvement” “improve overall student achievement” and “expects adequate yearly progress”. Do you see anywhere in there where it states that if a School is already doing great it need not improve or “progress”? I could not find it. Just constant mentions of “progress” & “improvement”.

Now- true, it is quite possible, that in the actual Bill, after much playing around by Commitees & Congress- might very well contain such language that says that if a School meets certain goals it no longer has to “progress” or “improve” in order to not “be failing”. And, MAYBE, somewhere in some clause of W’s Bill as presented, there is such a clause, even now. But no mention of it was in the Mercury, or anywhwere else i could find.

I did not give longer quotes from the Mercury as it is AGAINST THE SDMB RULES, let alone Copyright laws.

PLD: it takes a very “special” kind of person to state over & over that when anyone disagrees with you he is a “liar”. Can you just try to say you “disgaree” with me, or that I am wrong? Or is it that your words are written on slabs of stone from the Mount, and thus any of us puny mortals that dare to disagree must be "Lairs? :rolleyes:

34

I’m kinda slipping in here without reading all of the replies but shouldn’t there be an investigation into the school that is failing before vouchers are given?
Things like less than standard teachers,books etc. I’ve always been for some kind of test to see if teachers really know the stuff they are teaching. Also they should be graded by their peers. Maybe ten times a year an outside teacher would sit in on a class and grade the teacher.

35

What’s amazing is that you copied my quotes from the Bush plan and STILL missed it. Actually, it isn’t so amazing.

Here, let me make it painfully explicit for you, since you AGAIN quoted out of context. I will insert, for emphasis, in pretty bold letters, the information you failed to include from earlier in the section:

  1. Schools that fail to make adequate yearly progress for disadvantaged students in regards to the state-assessed math and reading standards will first receive assistance, and then come under corrective action if they still fail to make progress.

  2. High performing states that narrow the achievement gap between those who meet the standards and those who don’tand improve overall student achievement will be rewarded.

THis next one is incredible–you quoted it and didn’t even read or understand it. I don’t even have to insert anything.

  1. Under current law, districts must determine whether
    each Title I school is making adequate yearly progress based on whether its students are meeting state content and performance standards.

The whole bloody plan is contingent upon getting students to meet state reading and math standards. That’s how the plan defines progress, specifically as they apply to disadvantaged students and the gap between high- and low-performing students. RTFirefly, who is no fan of Bush or vouchers, even acknowledges this (“There’s no reason not to save a small handful of students from those failing schools. But it’s clearly not much of a solution for the short term - and even in the long run, the clear need is to improve the public schools. In all fairness, Bush’s plan addresses that need to a reasonable extent, and provides money to help failing schools improve, within that three-year window. Money, standards, and the threat of losing students to other schools . . .”)

So we’re left with two explanations: You are either incapable of reading and understanding very simple English, and literally need to have the math and reading standards mentioned in every single paragraph to realize that they are what’s being referred to; or you are a liar. Frankly, neither option much bolsters your case.

Feh. I quoted four paragraphs from a MUCH longer article. You quoted 23 words, selectively and out of context, and didn’t even supply a link. Why? Probably because it was convenient for you to insinuate that the article said something other than what it did.

You are a liar. At best, you have a habit of severely misrepresenting the content of your cites, or of making blanket statements then backpedalling. Do Catholics think the Pope is infallible, Danny?

Again with the persecution complex. Why are you the only one who has this problem in GD, Danny? Why have not only I but many other GD posters (Satan, Gaudere, Ben, et al.) noted this tendency of yours to misuse cites and use weasel words? There’s an old proverb that if 100 men tell you you are drunk, maybe you should lie down.

{fixed coding. --Gaudere}

[Edited by Gaudere on 01-26-2001 at 03:50 PM]

36

Yes- I read 3- and it says “Under current law, ditricts must determine… each …school is making adequate YEARLY PROGRESS, based on whether its students are are meeting… standards.” By which I interpret this to say the the standards it must meet is the amount of PROGRESS- ie IMPROVEMENT. “Progress” is NOT, nor can be “stability” or “staying” in one place. Progree means moving towards improvement, or improvement. Do you have a Dictionary that defines “progress” as “staying in one place, not moving, lack of improvement”? And look at “1. Schools that fail to make adequate yearly PROGRESS…” Yes- they define “progress” interms of 'standards"- but they insist upon “progress” every year. Show me a line that says "Schools which meet the standards need no further improvement or “progress”. RTFfirefly did not agree to your interpretation of the law- he simply agreed that Bushes plan is not all bad.

In order for you to show i am a “Liar” - you must PROVE: 1. My interpretation of Bushes plan is wrong- and just your shouting it louder & louder proves nothing. 2. My interpretation was wrong based upon info I had at hand- ie if stuff that I was unable to read in the Mercury has been published elsewhere- I still made a reasonable call based upon available info. and 3. That I KNEW my interpretation was wrong, and wilfully & knowingly posted it anyway in an attempt to mislead. Can you do all three?- I know you can’t- and thus- you, my freind- are the “liar”.

You must be a lot of fun- One of your “freinds” says “You know- I think the Bulls are gonna win tonites game”- and your reply “LIAR, the Bulls are the 3 point underdog!”. Every time someone dares to disagree with you- you trot out “LIAR!!”. We have an expression for your kind of folk- but I can’t use it here.

37

Phil and Daniel - could you two kindly take your personal debate to the Pit? Thanks.

38

So, wait a minute–you think it says, “Under current law, districts must determine each school is making adequate yearly progress based on whether its students are meeting the amount of progress”? What is your native language?

How can you be so obstuse as to not understand that the “standards” are the math and reading standards? I mean, really, I can only guess that you are deliberately misunderstanding it, so I have to ask, “Why?”

Let me see if I can, as a native English speaker, make it manifestly clear:

  1. States get to set math and reading standard for 3rd through 8th graders.
  2. Federal government requires all schools receiving Title I funds to strive for all students to meet those standards.
    2a. Schools also are required to close the gap between high- and low-performing students.
  3. Schools that fail to demonstrate progress towards 2 and/or 2a may lose funding and students after three years.

I mean, it’s all there, in black and frigging white.

Right. In meeting the reading and math standards.

Only. If. They. Are. Not. Meeting. The. Standards.

I’m not going to do your homework, Danny. Read the bloody report. Here’s a start: Please note that every single instance in which “adequate yearly progress” is referred to also refers to “disadvantaged students.” (e.g., in the section you slaughtered with ellipses above, “Under current law, districts must determine whether each Title I school is
making adequate yearly progress based on whether its students are meeting state content and performance standards. [Christ, that sentence enough makes you a liar.] The status quo does not ensure, however, that disadvantaged students within each school make progress.
Under this proposal, a state’s definition of adequate yearly progress must apply specifically to disadvantaged students, as well as to the overall student population.”) Any reasonable person would understand that to mean that if they are meeting the state-assessed standards or making good-faith efforts to close achievement gaps, they are in no danger of being called “failing.”

Which it is.

What, you only get your news from one source?

I frankly don’t know why you post what you post, Danny.

Yes, all my friends are “freinds.” :rolleyes:

Please provide four cites where I have done this. (Oh! the irony. Guess what it makes you if you can’t provide them?)

Don’t be afraid, Danny. Go for it.

39

[quote}
If you want better public schools, you need to pitch in and work for them. **[/QUOTE]

So, now I’ve summed up the whole arguement. Cool, eh?

I’d love vouchers. I hated not being able to afford a decent education. I wonder how many people on this board went to truly Bad schools? It’s scary to think that I have to depend on JPS to educate my kids. I’ll move to a city where at least the Public schools are better.

40

At least in California, teacher testing just ain’t gonna happen. The California Teachers Association is dead set against it, even if significant merit raises are involved.
Arguments against it can be found at http://www.cta.org.

A couple of other quick things:

  1. It would be trivial to make vouchers a non-first amendment violation. Churches are already exempt from property tax; precedent exists to give them tax breaks. You can also get tax breaks for donations to religious groups. These set precedence that would allow vouchers. It would only be a 1st issue is some religions (ideal one) got the vouchers, and some didn’t. If you give vouchers to Christian Schools, but not Wiccan schools, it is an issue. If you give them to any school, it isn’t. Sorry. That’s pretty much how the first works. If you know of a good Wiccan private school in the LA area, please let me know :slight_smile:

  2. The California’s Legislative Analyst’s Office estimates that the net savings for CA if it had passed prop 38 is about $700 million/year. I admit my source is extremely, extremely biased (http://www.svbizinc.com/opinions/opinionsdetail.asp?iid=120&aid=357) but I’d be more than interested in reading anything that looked like real number crunching on the subject.

I’m mostly going to stay out of this, since it seems to be a private flame war. I’m agnostic on vouchers, leaning slightly toward them, but don’t really feel the need to convince anyone of my point of view on the matter.