Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Here's the dirty little secret: your state voucher money isn't going to cover tuition for a decent private school, and chances are that there's no space for your kid anyway.
Maybe in your part of the country this is the case, but around here (NJ/NY) enough money gets spent on very low performing public schools per student that it could fully cover tuition for a decent private school. We're talking roughly $20K per student per year. Whether those schools would stay decent if they had an influx of students from the lowest performing publics all at once is another question.
Quote:
Originally Posted by randomparent
You are very fortunate that you had the wherewithal to provide daily transportation for your child. Impoverished families, those whose kids are stuck in failing schools, likely don't have the same option, which returns us to my previous point: vouchers are an illusion that allow us to think that we're providing a solution to inequalities in educational access, while creating new problems in the process.
Well, you let people leave the public system for private or charter schools, and unless they happen to be of almost exactly the same quality then yeah you're going to create inequality one way or the other, because people will be attending more different schools which are, well, different.
However, I find it disturbing how many people value equality over increased quality -- if some but not everyone get a better education, the attitude is that's a thing to fight against and it's better to have everyone in a lousy system.
I don't believe that vouchers or charters are the right option in every district, and HOW they are implemented can be the difference between being good and being bad, but the language and viewpoints of people who tend to oppose them across the board are generally imo repugnant.
Then I'd argue the state voucher program doesnt pay enough.. Give $10K if thats whats needed to provide adaquate education, it still saves the taxpayers 1/2 of what they currentlypay..
You're argument is similar to arguing that Section 8 doesnt pay enough for housing, so we should abandon the program, or food stamps doesnt cover 100% of food costs for everyone with children, so we should just abandon these programs..
Nonsense.
Wrong. There is no federal mandate that you maintain a domicile, but your child must attend school. For better or worse, public schools already provide that service. The state or district is under no obligation to fully-fund your choice to enroll your child in private school, particularly since private schools can deny enrollment to any student for any reason whatsoever. It all boils down to the same problem: vouchers undermine the foundation of equal access guaranteed by public schools.
...the language and viewpoints of people who tend to oppose them across the board are generally imo repugnant.
What I find truly repugnant are people of means using public monies to further their own children's prospects under the guise of improving things for the less fortunate -- which is a complete and total farce -- rather than fighting for schools that will truly serve the public interest.
Wrong. There is no federal mandate that you maintain a domicile, but your child must attend school. For better or worse, public schools already provide that service. The state or district is under no obligation to fully-fund your choice to enroll your child in private school, particularly since that private school can deny enrollment to any student for any reason whatsoever.
That reply makes even less sense.
There is no federal mandate that we maintain a domicile, so we must fund it, but your child must attend school, and therefore we shouldnt fund it adaquately if people choose to not send their kids to the public schools?
No one suggested they are obligated to fully fund private schools,
Quote:
Originally Posted by randomparent
It all boils down to the same problem: vouchers undermine the foundation of equal access guaranteed by public schools.
Nonsense..
Tell me, if the public pays $10K for a $10K education to send a kid to a private school rather than public, how is equal access being denied by the public schools?
What I find truly repugnant are people of means using public monies to further their own children's prospects under the guise of improving things for the less fortunate -- which is a complete and total farce -- rather than fighting for schools that will truly serve the public interest.
The voucher system is to allow people WITHOUT means to pay for private adaquate education..
People of means would be arguing against vouchers because they wouldnt want their "rich" kids to mingle with those "welfare" kids, who cant afford to attend the same "private" schools..
What I find truly repugnant are people of means using public monies to further their own children's prospects under the guise of improving things for the less fortunate -- which is a complete and total farce -- rather than fighting for schools that will truly serve the public interest.
Tell me, if the public pays $10K for a $10K education to send a kid to a private school rather than public, how is equal access being denied by the public schools?
Because a private school can deny entrance to any student for any reason at any time. And they do. Waving a voucher check in the registrar's face doesn't guarantee a place for your kid.
The voucher system is to allow people WITHOUT means to provide adaquate education..
People of means would be arguing against vouchers because they wouldnt want their "rich" kids to mingle with those who couldnt afford to attend the same "private" schools..
Wrong. There is no federal mandate that you maintain a domicile, but your child must attend school. For better or worse, public schools already provide that service. The state or district is under no obligation to fully-fund your choice to enroll your child in private school, particularly since that private school can deny enrollment to any student for any reason whatsoever. It all boils down to the same problem: vouchers undermine the foundation of equal access guaranteed by public schools.
What do you think happens in practice in areas with bad public school systems? The middle class move out en masse and the rich use private schools. So you have the poor in bad schools and a tremendous level of socioeconomic residential segregation -- but at least the poor are all equally screwed. Give people in such areas an opportunity to get their kids out via vouchers and/or charters and now some of the poorer residents who are a combination of lucky and motivated can get a decent education for their kids too. As an added bonus, do it well enough and some of the members of the next generation who make it might even choose to stay around.
There's another thread about a NYC Public School principal that didn't show up for work for 9 years.
The kids have no books and watch movies.
And in spite of not showing up she got overtime pay.
How's that for accountability ?
And in Texas the cheating scandal is well known and very wide-spread.
Public school administrators have even (gasp!) gone to prison for the big fraud they committed.
Lorenzo Garcia, the former superintendent of schools in El Paso, Texas, has been sitting in a federal prison since last year. He's the nation's first superintendent convicted of fraud and reporting bogus test scores for financial gain.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.