Why do Republicans/Conservatives hate Public Education so much? (versus, document, arguments)

[texdav]

Originally Posted by mackinac81

Now I'm not talking about all Republicans. But ever since I got my teaching degree, I noticed that conservatives, in general have a much more hostile attitude toward public ed. than liberals. My Democrat friends have always encouraged me in my career choice, while some conservative friends act like "well...whatever floats your boat man...". One friend even tried to get me to switch careers because public schools were so "anti-God". I got the impression that you can't be a true conservative and agree with universal public education. I really believe that what I'm doing is very beneficial to society.

Now I know public schools have problems, and there needs to be reform, but why are so many conservatives wanting to throw the baby out with the bathwater?

While i think what you are doing is good ;the same can't be said of the public school system. We spend more money than any other country with poor resuts. What your firends say is what alot of teaher say. Why is it that democrats are so against the voucher system to allow parents choice of public and private schools.Why; because of politcs and contrbutions to tehe democratic party by teachers. Why are both aginst giving every student the same choice as those that have money.Its the failing system that many parents and republicans want to change.I say vouchers gives poorer students better choices like the wealthy and the politicans and teacher by a wide margins want the staus quo of ever failing public schools.Afterall; if public schools are better then parent wil spend their vouchers at public schools.Its about choice that is equal and in teh end beeter for children.

[backfist]

Originally Posted by msconnie73

What you and others who are against vouchers are not getting (or refuse to get) is the concept of school choice! If a school is underperforming, what do you suggest minority parents to do if they cannot afford a private education for their child and efforts to enact change in their child's school are ineffective? What would you say to the parents?

"Sorry, we won't provide you with a voucher as we do not want one cent of taxpayer funds to go towards private or religious schools. We want to protect the public school bureaucracy and teacher union interests from any competition so we are going to maintain the status quo. If you are not happy with the performance of your child's school and wish to send them to a private school where they have a better shot at learning, then you need to pay for it yourself! If you cannot afford it, then your child is mandated by law to attend the local school regardless of whether your child is actually being educated or not!"

I put my money where my mouth was, and became an advocate of public school choice. See, there are plenty of people who pose and posture like they're sooooo concerned about urban and rural under-educated kids. But in reality, those poseurs simply want the government to fund their own little educational moat around the remaining "good" suburban schools.

With true public school choice, those same urban and rural kids that y'all claim to worry so much about, can attend any "good" suburban public school of their choice without placing taxpayer funds into unaccountable hands to do it.

[InformedConsent]

Originally Posted by backfist

I put my money where my mouth was, and became an advocate of public school choice. See, there are plenty of people who pose and posture like they're sooooo concerned about urban and rural under-educated kids. But in reality, those poseurs simply want the government to fund their own little educational moat around the remaining "good" suburban schools.

You didn't read the value-added article, did you? You make a mistake in assuming that students learn in "good" suburban schools. That may or may not be true, depending on the student. And, the sentiment you expressed is backwards. The people who want to construct a moat are those against school choice, public or private. Except in this case, they want to trap students in public schools that aren't educating them.

With true public school choice, those same urban and rural kids that y'all claim to worry so much about, can attend any "good" suburban public school of their choice without placing taxpayer funds into unaccountable hands to do it.

"Good" is relative to each student. You seem to not understand that. I'm for educating each student to the best of their effort/ability using all of the available resources. You're for placing restrictions on learning.

I'll ask you the same question I asked another poster on this thread, who by the way never answered - what do you have to gain by deliberately undereducating students?

[Chatteress]

Originally Posted by backfist

I put my money where my mouth was, and became an advocate of public school choice. See, there are plenty of people who pose and posture like they're sooooo concerned about urban and rural under-educated kids. But in reality, those poseurs simply want the government to fund their own little educational moat around the remaining "good" suburban schools.

With true public school choice, those same urban and rural kids that y'all claim to worry so much about, can attend any "good" suburban public school of their choice without placing taxpayer funds into unaccountable hands to do it.

Excuse me but I was one of those urban kids who was forced to attend a horribly underperforming school so don't just sit there and act like you know what my motivations are about. Fortunately, my college provided remedial education that allowed me to complete the college-level coursework that my high school failed to prepare me for! The state colleges would not have to spend tons of money remediating students if the public school system was doing its job!

[Valley Native]

Originally Posted by TristansMommy

ValleyNative.. I did not DEFAULT on my mortgage!! GET YOUR FREAKIN FACTS STRAIGHT..

I short sold onmy mortggae.. I CRIED ON CITY DATAT ABOUT THE BS YOU DEAL WITH WHEN YOU DEAL WITH A MORTGAGE COMPANY.

AGain.. you CARE NOTHING ABOUT EDUCATION OR CHILDREN. YOU SEE NOTHING OF VALUE IN CHILDREN WHO ARE THE FUTURE.. AND IM' NOT THE ONLY ONE WHOS CALLED YOU OUT ON .

YOU POSTS ARE SELFISH DIATRIBE OF NONSENSE!! PERHAPS YOU WOULD BEST SERVE SOCIETY BY LIVING IN A MOUNTAIN SOMEWHERE IN A COMMMUNITY OF ONLY 1 YOU....

I HAVE MANY WONDERFUL THINGS I'D LIKE TO SAY TO YOU.. BUT THEY ARE UNFORTUNATELY AGAINST CD RULES

Wow! Excellent performance! That's a better tantrum than I bet your two year old could ever throw. Me personally, I'll give that a 9.5 rating ... but we still have to wait for Paula and Simon to judge your performance.
()

Originally Posted by bluebelt1234

I am not full of emotion. I am tired of ignorant people like yourself thinking they know everything about education. You have no clue and maybe you should get one. When do you want to come teach in my classroom? I think you will change your mind about education. I promise that when you are first dealing with a disruptive student, then you will change your mind. It takes a special person to do this job and you clearly don't value teachers.

I believe you are the one who needs to get a clue. Never once have I downplayed the role of teachers. As a matter of fact, I feel sorry for what you have to put up with on daily basis concerning all the disruptive kids, parents who don't cooperate, and the never ending bureaucracy. Those three things I just mentioned are EXACTLY why the public school system is ineffective. Parents often treat the schools as free daycare, but they care very little about what goes on. Their kids are brats, and they make trouble for the students who want to learn & get along. Then, the bureaucratic red tape of the entire district/city/county/state makes teaching even more complicated. Oh, and the horrendous salary you receive for putting up with all that crap, no thanks. I DON'T WANT your job!

So this brings up a curious question: why are you even working in the public school system if things are so bad and stressful? Teaching isn't an easy job ... but you would likely have much more satisfaction from your career if you were to transfer to a private school. I don't know if you live in the Phoenix metro area like I do, but there are lots of private institutions in & around Phoenix where you can apply. The wages are better, the calliber of parents/kids is usually higher, and there is much less bureaucratic nonsense.

Originally Posted by bluebelt1234

You don't care about kids.

Since I don't have children, you would be correct. Why should I care about other people's kids?

Originally Posted by bluebelt1234

It is a known fact that Arizona ranks 49th in education spending.

And even then, approximately 43% of the state budget is allocated toward public education ... which greatly outranks all other expenditures. It matters not where Arizona ranks in terms of spending, it matters how WELL the allotted funds are being used. In Arizona (as well as many other states), hardly anything in control of the government is managed very effectively. ADOT is a good example ... but that's another topic.

Originally Posted by bluebelt1234

Most of the attitudes I have seen about education in Arizona are something like this, "Why should we be expected to pay 5.00 extra each year to the public schools?" "Who cares if college is so expensive? These students can just get loans." "Teachers make too much money and need to make less." "We should cut teachers benefits in order to save our budget." Sadly, these are direct quotes from our state legislature and the governing board at the district I work for.

Great Day already answered your statement about the $5 extra tax, and he's absolutely correct:

It is not "$5.00" of tax. It is $5.00 per $1000.00 of assessed value. So, if your home has an assessed value of say, $100,000, the tax would be $500 extra on your home

Originally Posted by NorthPoleMarathoner

I am opposed to public education because it doesn't work. Seems like a good reason to get rid of it to me.

Just reading through these posts proves that we have become an uneducated country.

Yes, especially a certain "mommy" who likes to make accusations, while unable to write a coherent posting much of the time. So much for the value of public schools, huh?

Originally Posted by NorthPoleMarathoner

Why would anyone think conservatives or republicans are opposed to public education? What have republican lawmakers done to try and eliminate public education? Throw more money at is all they have ever tried to do.

One of the main themes of George Bush's 2000 campaign was No Child Left Behind. That was supposed to improve/support/help public education. And republicans voted for him. So why would anyone think republicans want to get rid of public education? LOLs. You have to suspend all reality to believe that.

You are absolutely 100% correct. The "neo con" Republicans are in favor of more government in our lives ... and sadly, their policies have pretty much taken over the GOP, which is one reason I'm no longer a Republican. No Child Left Behind was a joke (as I'm sure many people of on both sides of the aisle & in between will agree with). It's further evidence that there is no improvement whenever something is implemented on a federal level. In fact, it usually becomes larger, more wasteful, and less effective.

Government should only be involved in securing our borders, and getting rid of the criminal element ... which is why the military, law enforcement, and the court system are needed. Most everything else (including education, health care, and finance) can & should be run on a privatized level. That way, it allows competition to take over, which creates the initiative to achieve better results.

[backfist]

Originally Posted by msconnie73

Excuse me but I was one of those urban kids who was forced to attend a horribly underperforming school so don't just sit there and act like you know what my motivations are about. Fortunately, my college provided remedial education that allowed me to complete the college-level coursework that my high school failed to prepare me for! The state colleges would not have to spend tons of money remediating students if the public school system was doing its job!

You missed the point. Had your momma and daddy been allowed to send you to whichever public school you wanted--a school that would have educated you well, without having to pay the enourmous costs of private school tuition--you likely wouldn't have been trapped in that horribly underperforming school.

[backfist]

Originally Posted by InformedConsent

You didn't read the value-added article, did you? You make a mistake in assuming that students learn in "good" suburban schools. That may or may not be true, depending on the student. And, the sentiment you expressed is backwards. The people who want to construct a moat are those against school choice, public or private. Except in this case, they want to trap students in public schools that aren't educating them.


"Good" is relative to each student. You seem to not understand that. I'm for educating each student to the best of their effort/ability using all of the available resources. You're for placing restrictions on learning.

Oh stop with the "why do you hate children?" silliness.

Once again, if students trapped in public schools were allowed to leave that school, and attend whichever public school they chose, there isn't a thing wrong with that. Public schools began failing on the government's watch; we must make them fix the public school problems. Not turn over taxpayer funds to private interests who are unaccountable to the public.

[Chatteress]

Originally Posted by backfist

You missed the point. Had your momma and daddy been allowed to send you to whichever public school you wanted--a school that would have educated you well, without having to pay the enourmous costs of private school tuition--you likely wouldn't have been trapped in that horribly underperforming school.

What if a "better" public school district is too far away to reasonably commute to and there's a nearby private school that will serve the children's educational needs? So the only options for parents is to either drive miles away to a better public school district or have their kids stay in the low performing public school then?

[InformedConsent]

Originally Posted by backfist

You missed the point. Had your momma and daddy been allowed to send you to whichever public school you wanted--a school that would have educated you well, without having to pay the enourmous costs of private school tuition--you likely wouldn't have been trapped in that horribly underperforming school.

Enormous costs of private school? Think again - private school is actually a better deal than public school for taxpayer funding - more bang for the taxpayers' bucks. Just one example:
The Real Cost Of Public Schools - washingtonpost.com

[InformedConsent]

Originally Posted by backfist

Oh stop with the "why do you hate children?" silliness.

Why? I'm exposing it for what it is - trapping students in the public schools that aren't educating them.

Once again, if students trapped in public schools were allowed to leave that school, and attend whichever public school they chose, there isn't a thing wrong with that.

And if a private school would better meet a student's educational needs, what then? Special Ed kids already have the right to use taxpayer money to attend private schools when the public school doesn't meet their educational needs, via IDEA. Why doesn't everyone else?

Public schools began failing on the government's watch; we must make them fix the public school problems. Not turn over taxpayer funds to private interests who are unaccountable to the public.

Well, we've waited DECADES for that. Guess what? It didn't happen. NCLB can't even make it happen - look at how the states manipulate their tests and 'passing' scores to make it look like they're educating students when they're not.