# Why are Democrats opposed to school vouchers? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 17, 2013, 7:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-democrats-opposed-to-school-vouchers/669084 "2013-09-17T19:47:29Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![Algher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Algher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Algher)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2013, 7:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-democrats-opposed-to-school-vouchers/669084/141 "2013-09-19T19:48:28Z")
> [@YogSosoth](#): > > So what happens to the poor family that can’t make up the difference when all of the money is taken out of their schools? All of the money is not taken out of their school. One student leaves, and takes their portion of funding with them. This reduces the cost of the school by one student. ---
**Author:** ![Algher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Algher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Algher)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2013, 7:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-democrats-opposed-to-school-vouchers/669084/142 "2013-09-19T19:52:16Z")
> [@kunilou](#): > > Screw “scientific evidence.” Let’s look at the real world for a minute. > > Here in the St. Louis area we have two poor, inner-ring suburban school districts that have lost state accreditation. According to state law, that means students from those districts can transfer to an accredited district and the failed district must pay their tuition. > > This gives us exactly the kind of situation that voucher advocates want. Even better, because we’re only talking about public schools, so there’s no church/state or other side issue. > > Approximately 25% of students from those districts have taken advantage of the program and transferred to other public schools. It’s obviously too early to tell how this is going to work out for the students, but we know one thing already: the two districts are rapidly going broke. > > The math is simple. The school districts’ state funding (approximately 50% of their total budget) is tied directly to their enrollment. So for every student that transfers, the district loses half its funding, but has to pay the other school district 100% of the tuition. > > When the districts go broke (probably sometime late this school year) a) who pays the tuition b) how do they pay for the education of the 75% of students who didn’t transfer and c) how do they finance the transfer program on a sustainable basis? > > And all this is because those two school districts are educationally inadequate. Do you want to extend that type of financial instability to school districts who are doing a decent job just because parents want to send their kid to a private school? That sounds like a problem in how the law was written for St. Louis, not a problem with vouchers or school choice. The losing district should hand over their 50%, and the gaining district gets the rest of the money from the state. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2013, 7:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-democrats-opposed-to-school-vouchers/669084/143 "2013-09-19T19:55:37Z")
> [@Algher](#): > > All of the money is not taken out of their school. One student leaves, and takes their portion of funding with them. This reduces the cost of the school by one student. No, it doesn’t. Many costs are not per-pupil costs (e.g., building maintenance, basic administration, EC services). Part of the reason why schools want more students is because that means each kid is paying a smaller portion of those overhead costs, and therefore there’s more money available to every kid for the per-pupil expenses. ---
**Author:** ![Cheesesteak](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cheesesteak/32/3694_2.png) [@Cheesesteak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cheesesteak)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2013, 8:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-democrats-opposed-to-school-vouchers/669084/144 "2013-09-19T20:12:12Z")
> [@ITR\_champion](#): > > a failing public school, We need to go to the school right now! The school? What is it? It’s a big building with teachers and students, but that’s not important right now. Jokes aside, schools are just collections of people in a building, what makes one school a success and another school a failure? Is it the decisions of the administrators? If so, hire better administrators in your public school, problem solved. Is it the quality of the teachers? If so, get teachers from the same pool of talent that private schools use, problem solved. (of course, this will take time, however we’ve believed that our school system sucks ass for decades, plenty of time to adjust our hiring policies) Is it the socioeconomic dynamics of the student body? If so, you’re completely fucked, because > [@](#): > > future drop-outs who do drugs, turn violent, and are utterly uninterested in studies or going to college, are eligible for vouchers, same as everyone else, and will infect your private schools just like they do public schools. ---
**Author:** ![Algher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Algher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Algher)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2013, 8:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-democrats-opposed-to-school-vouchers/669084/145 "2013-09-19T20:19:09Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > I care. It’s my tax money and my tax money does not go to fund religion. It’s the Constitution. > > And, teaching creation Science or All Koran, 100% Koran nothing but Koran doesn’t _benefit society as a whole._ Yes, it does. I can use Pell grants and Sallie Mae loans to go to Oral Robert University, Notre Dame, Liberty, etc. The money goes to the students, they choose where to take it. ---
**Author:** ![Algher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Algher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Algher)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2013, 8:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-democrats-opposed-to-school-vouchers/669084/146 "2013-09-19T20:20:15Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > No, it doesn’t. Many costs are not per-pupil costs (e.g., building maintenance, basic administration, EC services). Part of the reason why schools want more students is because that means each kid is paying a smaller portion of those overhead costs, and therefore there’s more money available to every kid for the per-pupil expenses. So fix the law about revenue sharing in the public schools. This is easily addressable. And don’t whine about how hard it is to fix the law. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2013, 8:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-democrats-opposed-to-school-vouchers/669084/147 "2013-09-19T20:24:04Z")
> [@Cheesesteak](#): > > Is it the socioeconomic dynamics of the student body? If so, you’re completely fucked, because [future drop-outs who do drugs, turn violent, and are utterly uninterested in studies or going to college] are eligible for vouchers, same as everyone else, and will infect your private schools just like they do public schools. I disagree that they’ll infect the private schools. Those kids probably need EC services. They probably need transportation to school. They probably need help from a social worker. They probably need a cafeteria lunch. And they probably need an involved parent. A private school just has to say, “Sorry, we offer excellent academics, but we don’t offer EC services, transportation, social work, free hot lunch,” and suddenly, without denying admission to anyone, those kids aren’t going to show up. Most importantly, those kids are likely to be the kids whose parents aren’t emphasizing academics very strongly in the home, for whatever reason. Those kids are the ones who aren’t likely to have a parent applying for vouchers. So they won’t get into the school in any case. There’s a great local charter school in my community that offers an arts-based curriculum. I know more than one family who’s delighted with the education their kids are getting there. It’s about 20 minutes outside of town. Wanna guess whether they offer a bus? Wanna guess what percentage of the kids at that school come from families that can’t afford a car? If their academics aren’t far better than the ones at a public school, they’re squandering their situation. Without actively excluding anyone, they’ve filtered out the kids with the most needs from their population. And that’s fine, as long as we recognize what’s going on, and don’t crap all over the public schools that don’t apply such a filter. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2013, 8:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-democrats-opposed-to-school-vouchers/669084/148 "2013-09-19T20:25:10Z")
> [@Algher](#): > > So fix the law about revenue sharing in the public schools. This is easily addressable. > > And don’t whine about how hard it is to fix the law. Not whining, dude. But since I’m not convinced that vouchers are the way to go, I’ve got zero incentive to fix a bad idea. If there are problems with your bad idea, YOU fix it and come back to the table with a slightly less bad idea. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2013, 8:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-democrats-opposed-to-school-vouchers/669084/149 "2013-09-19T20:45:01Z")
> [@Algher](#): > > All of the money is not taken out of their school. One student leaves, and takes their portion of funding with them. This reduces the cost of the school by one student. So this whole thread is about one student? Why didn’t you say so! That’s a horse of a different color! ---
**Author:** ![Algher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Algher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Algher)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2013, 8:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-democrats-opposed-to-school-vouchers/669084/150 "2013-09-19T20:45:50Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > Not whining, dude. But since I’m not convinced that vouchers are the way to go, I’ve got zero incentive to fix a bad idea. If there are problems with your bad idea, YOU fix it and come back to the table with a slightly less bad idea. I don’t consider it a bad idea. The only issue I see is ensuring there is an accreditation body checking on the private schools (as is done at the university level), and determining the value of the voucher to reflect the variable cost of educating a student. We are adding school choice, charter schools, and vouchers - all of this in response to perceived and real problems in the public school system. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2013, 8:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-democrats-opposed-to-school-vouchers/669084/151 "2013-09-19T20:49:37Z")
> [@Algher](#): > > I don’t consider it a bad idea. The only issue I see is ensuring there is an accreditation body checking on the private schools (as is done at the university level), and determining the value of the voucher to reflect the variable cost of educating a student. > > We are adding school choice, charter schools, and vouchers - all of this in response to perceived and real problems in the public school system. Right–I get that you don’t consider it a bad idea. I do, because I think it’s going to make things worse for the kids left behind, and that’s not a problem easily fixed by changing the law. The overhead issue I mentioned earlier is a real issue, but it’s minor compared to other problems. Charters? Great. Vouchers? No. ---
**Author:** ![Algher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Algher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Algher)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2013, 8:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-democrats-opposed-to-school-vouchers/669084/152 "2013-09-19T20:57:06Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > Right–I get that you don’t consider it a bad idea. I do, because I think it’s going to make things worse for the kids left behind, and that’s not a problem easily fixed by changing the law. The overhead issue I mentioned earlier is a real issue, but it’s minor compared to other problems. > > Charters? Great. Vouchers? No. Why are Charters OK but Vouchers bad? ---
**Author:** ![ITR\_champion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/c67d28/32.png) [@ITR\_champion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ITR_champion)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2013, 8:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-democrats-opposed-to-school-vouchers/669084/153 "2013-09-19T20:58:07Z")
> [@Saint\_Cad](#): > > So a metastudy that does not use one piece of quantitative testing is ok with you? As I pointed out, the study did not use any studies that demonstrates that vouchers improve student achievement in any meaningful way. Instead it uses studies that show that if you pick something you tend to attach better qualities to it than if something is chosen for you. Is that a surprise? I’m not quite sure what you’re talking about. The [paper](http://www.edchoice.org/CMSModules/EdChoice/FileLibrary/656/A-Win-Win-Solution---The-Empirical-Evidence-on-School-Vouchers.pdf) I linked to gathers the results from ten matched-pair experiments comparing students who used vouchers to attend private schools to students who were denied vouchers and remained in public schools. All ten of those experiments measured student performance by numerical measures: test scores and, in some cases, graduation rates. In addition to this, some of the experiments surveyed the parents regarding their satisfaction. Overwhelming, parents were more satisfied when their kids attended private schools, rather than public schools. This is not surprising; it’s one of the many predictable advantages of a voucher program. > [@](#): > > And as I pointed out, in an empirical study can indicate improvement but like Greene’s study, it indicates that students on vouchers did better than their peers. We have no way of knowing the demographics of the students that chose to use the vouchers. Greene’s study, which can be read in its entirety [here](http://educationnext.org/files/ednext20012_46b.pdf), is a randomized study. A body of poor families in Charlotte applied for vouchers. Some children were chosen at random to get vouchers, others were denied. Those who were denied vouchers became the control group. Since the determination process was random, the voucher group and the control group had the same demographics. That’s exactly what a randomized assignment process in an experiment is supposed to achieve. > [@](#): > > Also, we concluded that the voucher students got somewhere around 2 more questions right on average on the ITBS but without statistical test (which for this data would be easy to do), there is no way to know if that result was significant or within the realm of randomness. Instead we get the claim that since the score was better obviously it was because of the vouchers which is an error no researcher should make. > > Care to counter that? Perhaps I missed it, but I don’t see where you’re getting the “2 more questions right” data point. The study says this: After one year, the results show that students who used a scholarship to attend a private school scored 5.9 percentile points higher on the math section of the ITBS than comparable students who remained in public schools. Choice students scored 6.5 per- centile points higher than their public school counterparts in reading after one year. Using a statistical technique known as instru- mental analysis to adjust for the potential bias of non- compliance yields results that remain strong and positive. The results of this analysis show that, after only one year’s time, attending a private-school improved student performance on standardized tests in math and reading by between 5.4 and 7.7 percentile points. On average, a scholarship raised students from the 30th percentile to the 37th percentile. This is a fairly large gain—approximately 0.25 standard deviation in math and reading. To put this gain in perspective, the difference nationwide between minority and white students is approximately 1.0 standard devi- ation. The benefits of the Charlotte CSF program are roughly one-quarter as large at the end of only one year. ---
**Author:** ![monstro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba9def/32.png) [@monstro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/monstro)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2013, 8:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-democrats-opposed-to-school-vouchers/669084/154 "2013-09-19T20:58:37Z")
If my kid is already in private school (let’s say he gets a partial scholarship) because the local public school is a low-performing school, would I be eligible for a voucher to pick up the remaining cost? Is simply being from a low-performing school suffiicient for getting a voucher? If so, how do you stop middle class parents from moving into poor neighborhoods so they can snatch up all the vouchers? Or if all you have to do is demonstrate that the school is failing your kid somehow, how will this be determined? Should a D student with high test scores get a voucher to go to a fancy-pants “genius” school so she can be challenged? Why not? Why should the voucher only be used to advanced the education of those with the lowest ROI? ---
**Author:** ![ITR\_champion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/c67d28/32.png) [@ITR\_champion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ITR_champion)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2013, 9:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-democrats-opposed-to-school-vouchers/669084/155 "2013-09-19T21:01:17Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > Your proposal lets fewer kids fall a greater distance through the cracks, by allowing a few kids to escape to the detriment of the kids who are left behind. What evidence do you have to back up this claim? Voucher programs have been implemented in dozens of states, counties, and cities in this country. If there’s a measurable “detriment” to the kids who are left behind, surely you can cite some research which says so. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2013, 9:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-democrats-opposed-to-school-vouchers/669084/156 "2013-09-19T21:22:41Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > So, no poorer or middle class families will be able to make a different choice for their kids with Vouchers of less than 100%? That’s not right. There are people all along the economic scale. Rich people aren’t really helped by vouchers, in that they can send their kids to the school of their choice anyway. The people who are helped by them are those who would like to but wouldn’t be able to without the financial assistance. > > The larger question is this: Although we might all agree that is it serves society well to have us fund education, why must it be the case that the system that served us well in the past is the one and only one that can serve us well now and in the future. It used to be that no matter where you lived, school was a ticket out and up. Sadly, today that is not the case. For the past several decades we’ve seen inner-city families stuck in poverty for generations. The schools are failing them. We’ve thrown all manner of money at them and it does not fix the problem. We need need a new model for education our youth. Particularly the youth of our poor. In the same post, you seem to be saying, “hey, so what if vouchers don’t really help the poor. isn’t helping SOMEONE better than helping noone?” and later on you seem to be saying “hey, education is supposed to be the great equalizer especially for the poor so we really need this voucher system” So at the same time that you seem to admit that voucher systems as they currently exist don’t help the poor, you use helping the poor as the argument for adopting a voucher system. > [@Farin](#): > > I don’t mind vouchers, simply because they encourage competition, but I think you’re wrong here. Vouchers should be had by all. > > Vouchers should be for the amount of money it takes to educate a student for a year (with fractional teacher pay, administrator pay, and all of that factored in). If you charge more than the voucher pays for your private school, you should not be allowed to accept the voucher. So if you are a rich guy sending your child to a fancy school, you get no help. But if you partake in the public school system and think a nearby school (public OR private that doesn’t charge more than the voucher) you should be able to go there, income class not withstanding. > > If you want to send your kid to a fancy rich school, go for it. But you get no help from the public funds. If you want to send your kid to a private school (with the voucher restriction above) then you should be able to. I could support that (it really just sounds like a charter school system). > [@DrDeth](#): > > This is what Vouchers are about- pushing Fundamentalist Christianity. If it actually helped the situation, I might be convinced to accept this sort of side effect. > [@Sinaptics](#): > > Additionally, schools are designed with a specific number of attendees in mind. Moving a bunch of kids out would most likely put a lot of strain on schools re: administrative costs. Unless you plan on knocking down the old schools to build newer smaller ones, which is most likely even more expensive, at least in the short term. Or you could redistrict and sell the surplus schools. Heck, one of the fanciest condo developments in DC used to be a school (high ceilings, huge windows, large open spaces, lots of parking and plenty of room for customization). > [@ITR\_champion](#): > > So when exactly should I expect the Democratic Party to “patch the sinking ship” and propose meaningful changes to the status quo, in which, as already established, the government classifies most schools in poor communities as failing? Obama clearly supports charter schools… As does the American Federation of Teachers. What makes your voucher plan better than charters? > [@jtgain](#): > > I take it then that you are opposed to the Earned Income Tax Credit and any payments for welfare, yes? > > If not, then why are my tax dollars used so that a poor person can take that money and put it in the collection plate at church? I am also against Food Stamps because a person might purchase items to use for a pot luck dinner at a religious function. You can’t buy prepared ready to eat food with food stamps. > [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > The Democratic party is afraid to tackle the root causes of failing students, which is POVERTY. That’s the elephant in the living room: too many children are growing up in poverty, which means high stress at home, which means food insecurity, which correlates with high crime neighborhoods. More and more families are trying to support themselves on a minimum wage which buys less and less. The kid who can grow up in these circumstances and thrive academically is thriving despite the circumstances, not because of them. If we want our schools to succeed, we need to eliminate poverty. But Republicans have currently won this ideological battle, so as long as Democrats are too timid to talk about ending poverty (or at least reducing it to, say, Scandinavian levels), you’re not going to hear meaningful changes. So why do the children of poor immigrants (whose parents frequently can’t even speak english) manage to overcome this disability so regularly? I don’t know what the answer is (and I don’t think its vouchers) but its not just poverty. > [@ITR\_champion](#): > > I entirely agree. There is absolutely no reason to expect the teachers unions to care about whether students get a quality education. I entirely expect that where they exist, teachers unions will oppose anything that benefits students if it hurts their members’ bottom lines, even if it’s a huge benefit for students and a minor loss for a few teachers. Much better if public school teacher unions didn’t exist, as they didn’t for a large majority of American history. > [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > No reason, that is, [except the evidence](http://neatoday.org/). > > This is a link to the magazine sent to NEA members. Sure, some of the articles are about teacher pay and about terrible reform efforts and the like. But other articles include: > -How Physical Fitness May Promote School Success > -Are We Failing Gifted Students? > -Why I’m a Common Core Advocate > -Childhood Obesity Awareness Month – September > > People who claim that unions aren’t passionate about the quality of education are, charitably speaking, ignorant. Uncharitably speaking, they’re lying to you. > > The people in the world who are most passionate about education quality are people who’ve devoted their lives to it: teachers. Trusting a Republican think tank to be sincere on the issue is like listening to wolves recommend design improvements to the sheep pen. I thought we stopped beating up on teachers after Newtown but I guess enough time has passed that we can revert to calling teachers bloodsucking leeches who put their own pecuniary interests over the welfare of their students. I wonder how many teachers have to throw themselves in front of flying bullets for people to stop bashing teachers for a whole year. > [@Farin](#): > > After all, what’s worse? Shoveling some more money into the private school to keep it afloat or let the school close and have 1,000 angry families pounding on your door about their kids not being in school? It’s why so many private businesses try to get on the government dime. You are sugegsting that the government will bail out private schools. They have not done this with failing charter schools in DC, why would they do this anywhere else. > [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > One quick note about charter schools: at least here in NC, they aren’t required to provide the same services as public schools (such as a cafeteria lunch program, transportation to and from school, and a complete range of EC services). But they get a portion of funding as if they did: a portion of our district’s bussing funds go to charter schools, since they just get per-pupil funding not broken out by services provided. > > The charter schools can’t turn anyone away. But look at what they don’t provide: transportation, food, EC services. Anyone care to guess which socioeconomic class most needs those services? Anyone care to guess which kids get excluded from charter schools that don’t provide these services? > > Now does anyone care to guess which socioeconomic class tends to perform worse on tests? > > It’s no wonder charter schools score higher on tests, sometimes, than local schools. The wonder is that they can’t manage to do it all the time. Hrmm, in DC, charter schools can’t cheat quite this much. They are very closely regulated and the also get consistently better results than other charter schools. I think the devil may be in the details. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2013, 9:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-democrats-opposed-to-school-vouchers/669084/157 "2013-09-19T21:22:50Z")
> [@Algher](#): > > Why are Charters OK but Vouchers bad? Charters are still overseen by Public officials, not a Church leader. ---
**Author:** ![eschereal](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eschereal/32/18939_2.png) [@eschereal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eschereal)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2013, 10:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-democrats-opposed-to-school-vouchers/669084/158 "2013-09-19T22:10:51Z")
Is it even possible to measure the effectiveness of a school using [standardized tests](http://www.fairtest.org/facts/howharm.htm)? ISTR one criticism of NCLB was that schools seriously concerned about funding in the context of NCLB would simply teach the students how to get good scores on the test, sometimes at the detriment of their broader education. The only real way to assess school performance is to look at the students a decade or two after they graduate – are they junkies, doctors, drug dealers, politicians, bank robbers or stock brokers? It really is a grey area that standardized testing simply cannot reach, and since contemporary outcomes (very former students) may not accurately reflect the current state of a given school, rating a school becomes a matter of guesswork at best. ---
**Author:** ![bump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7c8e57/32.png) [@bump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bump)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2013, 3:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-democrats-opposed-to-school-vouchers/669084/159 "2013-09-20T03:05:57Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > The Democratic party is afraid to tackle the root causes of failing students, which is POVERTY. That’s the elephant in the living room: too many children are growing up in poverty, which means high stress at home, which means food insecurity, which correlates with high crime neighborhoods. More and more families are trying to support themselves on a minimum wage which buys less and less. The kid who can grow up in these circumstances and thrive academically is thriving despite the circumstances, not because of them. If we want our schools to succeed, we need to eliminate poverty. But Republicans have currently won this ideological battle, so as long as Democrats are too timid to talk about ending poverty (or at least reducing it to, say, Scandinavian levels), you’re not going to hear meaningful changes. Here’s the thing though- should schools and legislators be overly concerned with the failing poor students to the possible detriment of the other students, or be primarily concerned with getting the best overall outcome which may well involve doing a sort of “educational amputation” and letting the poor kids do their thing, while they concentrate on the less poor to get a better overall outcome? That’s really what the voucher argument comes down to, I think, and it’s an interesting question to ponder. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2013, 3:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-democrats-opposed-to-school-vouchers/669084/160 "2013-09-20T03:09:10Z")
> [@bump](#): > > Here’s the thing though- should schools and legislators be overly concerned with the failing poor students to the possible detriment of the other students, or be primarily concerned with getting the best overall outcome which may well involve doing a sort of “educational amputation” and letting the poor kids do their thing, while they concentrate on the less poor to get a better overall outcome? > > That’s really what the voucher argument comes down to, I think, and it’s an interesting question to ponder. I get where you’re coming from. For a few years of my teaching, I was fighting an uphill battle to give advanced students their due: in order to meet NCLB goals, I was told to let advanced students work independently, because they’d be fine passing the test. I ignored those directions because I considered them deeply unethical. That said, I do think we need to treat it not as an either/or situation. We certainly need to give a lot of help to advanced students (which is, to be honest, my specialty: while I can teach students who are behind, I’m really damned good with kids who are advanced). But we must not do so by letting the kids in poverty be ignored. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-democrats-opposed-to-school-vouchers/669084.md?page=7) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-democrats-opposed-to-school-vouchers/669084.md?page=9)