Democrats INSIST on protecting public schools. WHY? (comparison, solutions, compared)

[InformedConsent]

Originally Posted by pknopp

I'm getting just fine results.

That's just your opinion, which may be severely flawed. You've never provided factual evidence that what you're stating is actually true.

[InformedConsent]

Originally Posted by pknopp

Here you go again....."stupid states, the federal government knows what it best for you".

The federal government doesn't control how vouchers are spent. The students and their families do.

[HappyTexan]

Originally Posted by le roi

because without public schools, the poor would be even more poorly educated than they are now

I've come to that conclusion myself.
I do teach in poor title 1 schools.
The goal there for many is to at least keep them in school to get a HS diploma.
Basic literacy and enough math to make them functioning members of society.

Those that do have goals are encouraged.

My son went through the public school system but in an upper middle class suburban neighborhood.
It's night and day compared to poor Title 1 schools.
I'm not in high crime or drug schools (I did try that and lasted but a week there), just low SES schools where there is a great lack of trying to do better coming from both students and parents.

You do what you can though and send them on to the next grade hoping they will stay in school.

[InformedConsent]

Originally Posted by Iamme73

I don't get the question. Protecting public schools from what?

Accountability and competition.

[InformedConsent]

Originally Posted by HappyTexan

No one likes to admit defeat especially politicians.

It's even worse for the NIMBY, deluded ordinary citizens. They think their public schools are good. MANY of them are very wrong about that.

[InformedConsent]

Originally Posted by le roi

because without public schools, the poor would be even more poorly educated than they are now

How does giving them access to a better education elsewhere make them more poorly educated?

[arjay57]

Public schools are fundamental to a free society. They have produced many of our greatest scientists, businessmen, military commanders and other leaders. They've lifted up countless citizens (including me and my family) and made the American dream possible.

So we need to be careful not to confuse specific problems with an attack on public schools themselves.

[InformedConsent]

Originally Posted by arjay57

Public schools are fundamental to a free society. They have produced many of our greatest scientists, businessmen, military commanders and other leaders. They've lifted up countless citizens (including me and my family) and made the American dream possible.

So we need to be careful not to confuse specific problems with an attack on public schools themselves.

It's hard not to attack public schools, en masse, when only 38% of 12th graders are proficient in reading, and only 25% are proficient in math. Those low percentages indicate a SYSTEMIC problem in our country's public schools.

[pknopp]

Originally Posted by HappyTexan

No one likes to admit defeat especially politicians.

'
Do you have the studies handy that show that the state tests scores are flawed?

[le roi]

Originally Posted by InformedConsent

How does giving them access to a better education elsewhere make them more poorly educated?

eliminating public schools doesn't give them a better education elsewhere

nor have any of the privatization schemes i have seen

they're designed to exclude the most unfortunate kids, whose parents cannot even be bothered to participate in voucher schemes, from their better-off peers, at unacceptably young ages.