Dismantle the Public Education System and Privatize it!! (drug, regular, solutions)

[truthhurts]

I’m interested in hearing what other think about Privatizing the school system and what you would do if you were the governor of your state. What steps would you take to improve your education system?

If I was the governor of my state I’d privatize most of the public school system. I would have the state government run short term schooling, trade schools, and vocational schools, but most k-5, 6-8, 9-12 would be privatized. I think the schools would run much more efficiently, the state would realize cost saving measures, as well as tax increases (schools would pay a tax under my system, although they would be subsidized for a 3 year period to start). Teachers pay would be dictated by the market and would go up based on performance and qualifications etc. Teachers Unions, would have to be company specific (meaning which ever school they are employed by). No more massive teacher lobbying Unions. As opposed to paying 5,000 dollars for a pupil, that money would go directly to the parents to choose the right school for their children etc. Parent’s responsibilities would increase, because they would now be responsible for looking up information, which would be readily available on schools etc and they would have to provide transportation (which for poorer families would be heavily subsidized via a tax credit for miles driven picking up or dropping off kids). This would probably provide an incentive for private operators of kid car pools, which would have to be regulated and meet standards set by the state for the safety of the kids. Also schools could contract third private truancy companies to make sure students attended schools on a regular basis etc. The education industry could add a huge boom to states bottom line.

What happens when one school outperforms others and all the parents want to send their children to that particular school, but demand has increased the cost? My hope is that under a privatized system, the school will expand and branch out to other areas and offer its services throughout the state etc. (Kind of like McDonalds etc)

What about schools that do not perform well, loose students, and eventually shut down, where will those students go? Here’s where government would come in. I think we’d provide some schooling for a short period until those parents can find adequate education at another school. State government would only provide short term learning until students can be absorbed into another privatized school.

What are your ideas for a privitized public education system?

[fishmonger]

Any privatized school system would aggravate and enlarge the current inequality of educational funding/standards between the children of poor/middle-class/wealthy parents, over the long term decreasing income mobility and also increasing the amount of religious indoctrination. Instead of trying to go back to something closer to the 1800's, why not look at the most successful public school systems in the world, whatever they are, and take some lessons from what they're doing? We don't need kids going to "McDonald's schools."

[Huckleberry3911948]

need voucher badly. greenspan gave a great talk on it on commonwealth club (SF).

[truthhurts]

Originally Posted by fishmonger

Any privatized school system would aggravate and enlarge the current inequality of educational funding/standards between the children of poor/middle-class/wealthy parents, over the long term decreasing income mobility and also increasing the amount of religious indoctrination. Instead of trying to go back to something closer to the 1800's, why not look at the most successful public school systems in the world, whatever they are, and take some lessons from what they're doing? We don't need kids going to "McDonald's schools."

The reference is to giving people ample choices. You could eat Wendy's, McDonalds, or Burger King on any given lunch break or bring food from your house. Well, studetns would have the opportunity to pursue similiar ventures. Perhaps some schooling companies would focus on math more heavily than english. Perhaps some would be more liberal arts focused or business focused, but would still meet core requirements. The school system would function no different than our current College System Functions.

To eliminate the disparity between the rich and the poor we are giving everyone choice. Currently that is the biggest problem between the rich and the poor the lack of choice. If you're wealthy you have two choices the well funded, great performing school in your neighborhood, or the more challenging priavte boarding school your parents can afford. If you're poor you have the crap hole under funded, poor teachers, and bad quality of school only. What's wrong with providing choice in education? We have choice in everything else?

Poor people choose what colleges to go to, why shouldn't they be able to choose which elementaries, middle, and high schools?

[fishmonger]

Originally Posted by truthhurts

The reference is to giving people ample choices. You could eat Wendy's, McDonalds, or Burger King on any given lunch break or bring food from your house. Well, studetns would have the opportunity to pursue similiar ventures. Perhaps some schooling companies would focus on math more heavily than english. Perhaps some would be more liberal arts focused or business focused, but would still meet core requirements. The school system would function no different than our current College System Functions.

To eliminate the disparity between the rich and the poor we are giving everyone choice. Currently that is the biggest problem between the rich and the poor the lack of choice. If you're wealthy you have two choices the well funded, great performing school in your neighborhood, or the more challenging priavte boarding school your parents can afford. If you're poor you have the crap hole under funded, poor teachers, and bad quality of school only. What's wrong with providing choice in education? We have choice in everything else?

Giving everybody vouchers would drive up the price of private education to the voucher value as a minimum... poor people would still end up in the most poorly funded schools with the underpaid teachers, no computers, corner cutting type places without the public standards to check if they were doing a halfway-decent job. Markets open up the possibility of collusion, private monopolies, and other profit-maximizing, student-hurting situations. I'd rather we give people a "choice" by creating more Section 8 Vouchers and incentivizing more economically diverse housing throughout metro areas, maybe building more of the mixed-income Hope VI things in the poorer and richer areas so that poor/working class people have more of a choice of where to live AND where to go to school.

[truthhurts]

Originally Posted by fishmonger

Giving everybody vouchers would drive up the price of private education to the voucher value as a minimum... poor people would still end up in the most poorly funded schools with the underpaid teachers, no computers, corner cutting type places without the public standards to check if they were doing a halfway-decent job. Markets open up the possibility of collusion, private monopolies, and other profit-maximizing, student-hurting situations. I'd rather we give people a "choice" by creating more Section 8 Vouchers and incentivizing more economically diverse housing throughout metro areas, maybe building more of the mixed-income Hope VI things in the poorer and richer areas so that poor/working class people have more of a choice of where to live AND where to go to school.

I never said anything about vouchers. I aimed at dismantling the whole public education system, that would not involve the use of vouchers. It would be a tax break for most and provide them with public monies set aside for eduction to use as they please.

I agree with some of your last point in terms of the current system we operate under. I think vouchers should only be targeted at the poor not the middle class, because for the most part the middle class recieves a decent education. I do however strongly disagree with with "forcing people" to live with one another. This again would require government to go to businesses and force them to sell housing to poor individuals at the expense of the richer individuals in the neighborhood. Who would make up the government subsidy to the corporations. The money is not going to come out of thin air? We do not need more mixed neighborhoods we just need higher standards, that can only be accomplished through more competition and fewer monopolies. Poor people can go to school with other poor people and learn equally as well as they could in a mixed school amongst rich people. Going to school with rich people is not going to make a poor person work harder in school or learn more efficently (now that is not to say they may not pick up some good habits here and there from more dedicated students). However, eliminating the inadaqucies of sub par teaching, sub par schooling, and providing an overall more competitive atmosphere will help achieve these goals.

[Lincolnian]

Truthhurts,

There are many successful public schools throughout the country. There are many problem schools as well. If you look at what separates the successful from the not so successful you will see that education and income levels of the parents are major factors in the achievement level of the children in the public schools they attend.

There are a number of reasons why but one of the main reasons is that the parents are vocal in how much they value education and expect the same of their children.

Many of the low performing schools are on the opposite end of the income spectrum and many of the children attending these schools have to deal with home environments predominantly run by single mothers who are often high school dropouts. The children also experience considerable disruption to their environment moving frequently (sometimes 3 or 4 times within a school year), having new people move in and out of their lives, have fractured and difficult to understand family structures consisting of brothers and sisters from different fathers/mothers often absent from their lives altogether. There also is a much higher incidence of drug and alcohol problems openly displayed in their home.

Additionally, many of the students in the poorly performing schools suffer from learning and/or physical disabilities resulting from poor prenatal care and unhealthy behavior by their mothers during pregnancy.

How would privatization deal with these problems? Would children from these environments with learning and behavior difficulties be given the same choices as those from homes where education is a high priority?

Keep in mind that many of the programs, funding, and disciplinary actions are subject to outside regulation and required by federal mandates.

The long and short of it is that education in America is a complex issue and can not be solved using cursory solutions. NCLB was a program of good intentions but the reality has done more damage IMHO than good. We now have a "competitive" system of schools teaching to the test which has resulted in inflating the Real Estate values of richer suburbs as concerned parents migrate out of their more diverse communities with lower average test scores to more homogeneous communities with higher average test scores.

NCLB's reality is that it is hurting cities and 1st-tier suburbs more than before the law was enacted.

Private schools don't have to worry because they aren't subject to any of NCLB's high-stakes testing requirements.

[Muhnay]

How does your plan effect home schooled kids?

[Bob The Builder]

Truth
The Teacher Union and lobby is just too powerful to permit privitization. I heard the Pres of the AFT say "there are no bad teachers". With this kind of mentality, there is no hope. I'm not saying that most teachers are bad, but I would be comfortable in saying that most teachers are of average intelligence and are guilty of ignorance, greed and petty prejudices as well as the next guy.

That being said, perhaps we need to think out of the box. We have a growing homeschooling trend. We have technology and we have multimedia cheap and easy.

My thought is that most subjects can be taught in a standardized, professional, entertaining way. Why not have George Clooney teaching American History in a well scripted multimedia series. Arnold Scwartzenegger could teach math. Fiddy Cent could teach economics! All subjects can be done up this way. Each subject can be reviewed, debated and adjusted to get the desired result by testing. Get the celebs to do it for free! Capture the attention of the kids. Inspire them.

Now I'm not saying have the kids watch TV all day, there has to be physical training and nutrition segments too. But I think a lot of time is wasted with non standardized and disinterested teaching.

[chielgirl]

Here's what a lot of people don't get. Government does not make a profit. Private industry makes a profit. There is no guarantee that private schools cost less. On an individual case, perhaps, but not generally.

Do not expect me to pay for private education. I pay taxes, willingly, for a public education. I went to private school where my parents paid; I am childfree and had no offspring. A public education is what I'm willing to provide to support my community.

Private schools not so much.
Religious schools not at all.