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.
Actually, there is no research to support this and there are areas (Washington DC and Minneapolis MN) where vouchers are quite prevalent. What generally happens is creaming, the most involved families, committed to education, pull their kids out and utilize the vouchers. (Better for those families, but really doesn't result in much improvement in the local school.)
I can't verify if this is true or not, but it's really irrelevant to those parents who care about their kids education. If vouchers are available, then the involved parents are going to take advantage of them, if necessary, for the benefit of their children. Everyone has the same opportunity - no excuses. If enough people in a single bad school do it, maybe the school will realize that they need to step up a bit. Eventually, either the school will get it's act together and prosper, or it will flounder and atrophy. And for the uninvolved parents that allow their kids to stay in a terrible school when vouchers are available - shame on them. There's no hope for them whatever you do!
And for the uninvolved parents that allow their kids to stay in a terrible school when vouchers are available - shame on them. There's no hope for them whatever you do!
Let's imagine a concerned parent who's trying their best for their kids, but is low on employment skills. This individual works full-time as a retail cashier. So they reside in a lousy school district because commonly, the bad school districts are where the housing is cheap. Now the state generously offers vouchers for each of this person's two kids. The vouchers are worth about half the cost of private school tuition, and all the private schools are a good distance from their home, and driving the kids to and from school would be impossible because the parent has to be at work. But they couldn't afford private school tuition, even with the voucher subsidy anyway. That's your hopeless parent who's going to leave their kids in the terrible school.
By supporting public schools I don't just support MY child's public school but the schools of the kids RainyDay is talking about. I care about those kids.
And, you can't turn this argument around by saying it's a choice to go to public school. That's so offensive to people who work hard just to pay the rent! A basic education is your right as an American. And, it's important to national security to have an educated and healthy population.
Why should you pay for the education of other people's children? Well, did you go to public school??? Who paid for YOUR education? Or for the education of the teachers who teach in your private school? Or for MOST people? Yeah...it's the public.
Why should everyone help pay for public education, even those who don't have kids or send their kids to private school? Because the purpose of our civilization is to perpetuate itself - and, we hope, get better and better. 50 years from now, most of us reading and typing here will be dead and gone, or close to it. The kids now in pre-K will be leading the nation. Our society requires us to contribute to schools and other public services out of the notion that our role in life is not exclusively to accumulate riches for ourselves, but to share in keeping the society going and leaving things in good shape for those who will follow us.
I don't have a problem with people debating the best way to do these things. However, those who just want to make NO contribution to the public good often seem not to notice how bound up with the rest of society their own interests are. As pless points out, pretty much everyone benefits from public education, indirectly if not directly. And then there's driving on the public roads, choosing a doctor who was trained at a public university (taxpayer-subsidized), etc.
Yes, it is. Besides being a human right, you cannot be denied an education in this country on any basis, whatsoever, except as a prisoner. This was made more clear in Brown vs Board of Education in 1954. It is an implied right, just like your right to privacy. Specifically, in Brown vs Board of Education: "(c) Where a State has undertaken to provide an opportunity for an education in its public schools, such an opportunity is a right which must be made available to all on equal terms."
Driving and education are not comparable at all. One requires a certain level of maturity and skill and the other provides that very thing.
By supporting public schools I don't just support MY child's public school but the schools of the kids RainyDay is talking about. I care about those kids.
And, you can't turn this argument around by saying it's a choice to go to public school. That's so offensive to people who work hard just to pay the rent! A basic education is your right as an American. And, it's important to national security to have an educated and healthy population.
Why should you pay for the education of other people's children? Well, did you go to public school??? Who paid for YOUR education? Or for the education of the teachers who teach in your private school? Or for MOST people? Yeah...it's the public.
There are so many things wrong with the statement. First off, as gt6974a mentioned, a basic education is NOT a right - read the constitution. With that said, I think every child deserves a good education. The fact is, though, that some parents aren't going to provide that for their kids - regardless of how much money we throw at them or their local government schools.
And IT IS a choice to attend public schools, regardless of your income. I don't know of any private school that doesn't offer scholarships - almost always based on need. Coupling a voucher system with generally available need-based scholarships would allow just about ANY student with caring parents to attend a private school. It just comes down to the priority of the parents.
I have a feeling that this thread could evolve into a discussion of liberal vs. conservative philosophies. I can feel the undertones. I think most people who vehemently oppose educational vouchers and school choice are the same people who want government schools (regardless of their quality) to survive and continue to indoctrinate our young people with liberal ideas. The government is the be-all and end-all and will provide for you from birth to grave - right?
Leaving aside the straw man characterization of liberal thinking, I guess Doctor T believes that if kids want a decent education, well they'd just darned well better exercise their CHOICE to pick well-heeled and/or self-sacrificing parents.
By supporting public schools I don't just support MY child's public school but the schools of the kids RainyDay is talking about. I care about those kids.
And, you can't turn this argument around by saying it's a choice to go to public school. That's so offensive to people who work hard just to pay the rent! A basic education is your right as an American. And, it's important to national security to have an educated and healthy population.
Why should you pay for the education of other people's children? Well, did you go to public school??? Who paid for YOUR education? Or for the education of the teachers who teach in your private school? Or for MOST people? Yeah...it's the public.
I could spend all day responding to this, but I am only going to touch on a few points. My biggest source of contention is that it is completely a choice of where you educate your kids (at least with a voucher system - in fact that is the whole point of vouchers). I have not read through the entire GA bill you cited so I cannot speak to how exactly the voucher bill is currently written, but the voucher system that I would fully support would cover the ENTIRE cost of private education. That way every parent (especially those fighting to pay the rent) could now choose to send their kid to the best private schools. In a system without vouchers, those parents have no choice, but with vouchers, they could "beat the system" and send their kids to the best schools. It would be "offensive (as you put it)" to keep these kids of low income familes confined to horrible schools when vouchers would give them the opportunity to attend better schools. Vouchers help people of all income levels, not just the wealthy.
Secondly, most people CHOOSE to send their kids to public schools (of course, there are some exceptions). As you have said before (in other posts and in other threads), you can afford private school, but for a variety of reasons, you like public schools. That is fine, but please do not tell me that is not a CHOICE for you to do so. A lot of other people are in your situation. I know a lot of people who live in million dollar homes who also choose public school. Good for them, but the point is that where you educate your children is a CHOICE. For the relatively small number of people who cannot afford that choice, a full voucher system would solve that problem.
Third, not that it matters, but my PARENTS paid for my education. However, I do not even understand the point of your third paragraph. I never said that educating the general population is not important. In fact, it is one of the most important responsibilities of our society. Also, I did not advocate doing away with all taxes... of course, we all need to contribute to common utilities, roads, national defense, etc. (the level of taxes is so crazy high in this country though that taxes have become a wealth distribution system). A voucher system (what this thread is really about) is similiar to giving residents over 62 years of age a property tax exemption for the school portion of their tax. In both cases, people are not directly paying for that which they do not use. However, both people who use vouchers and those 62 years and older still pay property tax that can go for other common uses.
Leaving aside the straw man characterization of liberal thinking, I guess Doctor T believes that if kids want a decent education, well they'd just darned well better exercise their CHOICE to pick well-heeled and/or self-sacrificing parents.
Not very practical. Although, I do believe that some people probably shouldn't have kids! (And I'm sure many parents wish they hadn't!)
Unfortunately, whether a child becomes a productive member of society, or a detriment to it, is largely determined by his/her parents. Like it or not, there is only so much we, as a society, can do about that. I would like to think that most public schools level the playing field a bit by providing the same opportunities to all children who attend a particular school. This only goes so far, though, as the parents still have the ultimate responsibility of educating their children. Clearly, this is a big reason why schools in South Forsyth (for instance) outperform most government schools in other parts of metro Atlanta. As a whole, we (in South Forsyth) are very involved with our schools. No amount of government or money can change that.
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.
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.
