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.
Schools usually take the lion's share of towns' budget, so to say "I like local govt, but not for schools" is like saying, "I like basketball, but without a ball"
Who's we? I think we need to shed the mentality of condescension, and social-engineering people like cattle by "masterminds" who know better than parents what's best for the specific needs. Which invariably means, heavy-handed Govt and politicians and bureaucrats who rule and decree over people.
From other examples, demographic gentrification does not turn easily into school gentrification. Surely, white males and females move into bad hoods, but most move out to the suburbs once kids approach school. Norwalk parents were a textbook example.
Left-wing media (the usual suspects such as NY Times, Huff Post, Salon, etc) have been peddling another lie -- "school choice is a fraud!!" Nothing is further from the truth.
The following study from U of Arkansas came out 3 months ago which concludes the opposite:
Page 40 and 41:
"We draw a few tentative policy recommendations from our study. We found that publicly-funded voucher programs show larger and clearer positive effects than privately-funded programs. Public funding could be a proxy for voucher amount, as publicly-funded vouchers tend to be of significantly greater value than privately-funded ones."
Page 42:
"Additionally, in terms of policy implications, it is critical to consider the cost-benefit tradeoffs associated with voucher programs. Wolf & McShane (2013) and Muralidharan et al. (2015) found that vouchers are cost effective, since they tend to generate achievement outcomes that are as good as or better than traditional public schools but at a fraction of the cost. The greater efficiency of school choice in general and school vouchers in particular are another fruitful avenue for scholarly inquiry".
University of Arkansas???? Arkansas...home of the Walton family...champion supporters of charter schools, school privatization and a few years ago donated millions to UofA to fund an "education reform" department to market their agenda. Enough said.
Do your homework Henry and don't write off accurate investigative reporting because it doesn't jive with your world view. Public money should not go toward private schooling (and charters are privately run, thus private). Selecting easy to teach kids and avoiding troubled kids isn't working miracles either. Charters are a scam and are allowed to happen due to greed on the investor's part and naivety on public school hating sheep.
Sour grapes for big govt lovers, big outdated teachers union lovers.
Read the academic, non-political study -- schools vouchers provide parents with same or better education than public schools, at the fraction of the cost.
But of course this is not about the kids, is it? It is about an ideology that recognizes no logic or facts.
LMAO about the bolded. I also find it hilarious that people like you complain about welfare freebies but support vouchers which are freebies to go to private school.
Did you read the study? Note that most of the positive outcomes- and definitely the largest- come from voucher programs outside of the US? In fact, based on a quick reading of the report I believe the authors note that for Treatment on Treated effects on both reading and math are null in the United States while positive abroad.
I think there are certain cases where vouchers can be helpful but to advocate for them as the panacea for education ignores the research on the topic- including the one you posted.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Henry10
Sour grapes for big govt lovers, big outdated teachers union lovers.
Read the academic, non-political study -- schools vouchers provide parents with same or better education than public schools, at the fraction of the cost.
But of course this is not about the kids, is it? It is about an ideology that recognizes no logic or facts.
I have to agree fixing the community would be best but there is no one willing to spend the money to do that so were stuck with finding workarounds and patching this and that as they can get some consensus on fixing schools.
Did you read the study? Note that most of the positive outcomes- and definitely the largest- come from voucher programs outside of the US? In fact, based on a quick reading of the report I believe the authors note that for Treatment on Treated effects on both reading and math are null in the United States while positive abroad.
I think there are certain cases where vouchers can be helpful but to advocate for them as the panacea for education ignores the research on the topic- including the one you posted.
Yeah that's why I said "possibly" with school choice. The studies seem to find improvements with desegregation and busing, some studies find small connections with vouchers, everything else seems up in the air.
My kids go to a charter school which works for me and other families but it's not going to fix all the problems.
Schools usually take the lion's share of towns' budget, so to say "I like local govt, but not for schools" is like saying, "I like basketball, but without a ball"
Who's we? I think we need to shed the mentality of condescension, and social-engineering people like cattle by "masterminds" who know better than parents what's best for the specific needs. Which invariably means, heavy-handed Govt and politicians and bureaucrats who rule and decree over people.
From other examples, demographic gentrification does not turn easily into school gentrification. Surely, white males and females move into bad hoods, but most move out to the suburbs once kids approach school. Norwalk parents were a textbook example.
Left-wing media (the usual suspects such as NY Times, Huff Post, Salon, etc) have been peddling another lie -- "school choice is a fraud!!" Nothing is further from the truth.
The following study from U of Arkansas came out 3 months ago which concludes the opposite:
Page 40 and 41:
"We draw a few tentative policy recommendations from our study. We found that publicly-funded voucher programs show larger and clearer positive effects than privately-funded programs. Public funding could be a proxy for voucher amount, as publicly-funded vouchers tend to be of significantly greater value than privately-funded ones."
Page 42:
"Additionally, in terms of policy implications, it is critical to consider the cost-benefit tradeoffs associated with voucher programs. Wolf & McShane (2013) and Muralidharan et al. (2015) found that vouchers are cost effective, since they tend to generate achievement outcomes that are as good as or better than traditional public schools but at a fraction of the cost. The greater efficiency of school choice in general and school vouchers in particular are another fruitful avenue for scholarly inquiry".
Local government does lot's of things but yes education eats up the budget. Shift some over to regional education districts instead keep the rest for roads, infrastructure, etc.
If we want CT to be prosperous center of industry in the modern world at least some of our cities need to be livable as there is an over- exaggerated but real trend of people moving to cities. CT needs some of those people to stay here for our economy to grow, (at least that's my opinion). And yes this does link with the fact the people move to the suburbs when they have kids, but the trend (while still huge) seems to be tapering off in cities with good schools.
True. What's funny is the amount of people that want to segregate from the life they grew up in. I'm not talking about someone that lived in a crime infested neighborhood who got out, either. The amount of people that were solidly middle class and/or had blue collar parents who went to average public schools and did very well that now avoid the "types" they grew up among is amusing.
Why is it "amusing"? It depends on who the person is....
I know several gay people who grew up in a blue collar environment where being gay in that type of social realm was taboo... and not widely accepted (still isn't in many areas, even in CT)..
There are also people who are bitter toward anyone who worked hard and has a great job. My best friend from college is from West Virginia... now lives in CT. He makes well into the six figures and drives an Audi. We took a road trip last summer to see his family in WV and the amount of stares we got just because he drives an Audi was crazy! People actually gave him dirty looks...
Then there are the people who marry into money. I have a good friend who grew up middle class and married a girl who is very rich. He drives a mercedes to his blue collar job and lives in an 800k house. So on the outside he may seem like he's a snob but he's actually a really cool guy. She's great too.
You can't group everyone by socio economics. Everyone is different and everyone has a story. Stop lumping people into one category because that's how stereotypes are made.. not everyone who has money is evil, AMSS..
University of Arkansas???? Arkansas...home of the Walton family...champion supporters of charter schools, school privatization and a few years ago donated millions to UofA to fund an "education reform" department to market their agenda. Enough said.
Do your homework Henry and don't write off accurate investigative reporting because it doesn't jive with your world view.
Walton Foundation funds left-wing policy studies at U of A as well, such as diversity, multiculturalism, environmentalism, etc.
Besides, authors of the study put the study out there for their peers to review and critique. Plus that study also gives an enumeration of other studies, pro and anti-vouchers, so you can dig even deeper.
Lastly, if you throw around your opinions like vouchers are "fraud", "scam" etc., why don't you provide your own studies to back up your opinion?
Quote:
Originally Posted by AMSS
Public money should not go toward private schooling (and charters are privately run, thus private).
Quote:
Originally Posted by AMSS
LMAO about the bolded. I also find it hilarious that people like you complain about welfare freebies but support vouchers which are freebies to go to private school.
We pay private providers plenty of things from our pubic money. At their profit. Take Medicare, for example. And many other examples.
Besides, why is "private" and "profit" such a dirty word? Without it, we wouldn't have social programs. If so, why not schools?
Quote:
Originally Posted by JGBigGreen
Did you read the study? Note that most of the positive outcomes- and definitely the largest- come from voucher programs outside of the US?
I am confused -- we say "hey look at the world", but now we say "hey don't look at the world!!" Yes, I read the report, plus its 20 pages of tables at the end.
If you go through -- you'll notice that trend is very clear -- in US, most voucher programs (in several cities) have students perform better than traditional school. Yes results may be the same for the 1st or 2nd year, but long term (4 years) or more, most graphs show improvement. It looks like Louisiana's program drags everybody else down. I don't know why.
But that's quarter of my argument. The other quarter is that vouchers perform as well as traditional.
The remaining half of my argument is that charter schools perform same or better, but at the fraction of the cost.
Aren't some people here saying -- city kids perform worse because of (lack of) money?
Quote:
Originally Posted by JGBigGreen
I think there are certain cases where vouchers can be helpful but to advocate for them as the panacea for education ignores the research on the topic- including the one you posted.
I didn't say that vouchers are panacea everywhere. Not sure how you got there. What I have been saying is that I like local control, I don't want centralization of education, plus I would like to see options, like charter schools. Above all, I want parents to decide, but they can't decide if society only offers one option -- which is textbook status quo.
Why is it "amusing"? It depends on who the person is....
I know several gay people who grew up in a blue collar environment where being gay in that type of social realm was taboo... and not widely accepted (still isn't in many areas, even in CT)..
There are also people who are bitter toward anyone who worked hard and has a great job. My best friend from college is from West Virginia... now lives in CT. He makes well into the six figures and drives an Audi. We took a road trip last summer to see his family in WV and the amount of stares we got just because he drives an Audi was crazy! People actually gave him dirty looks...
Then there are the people who marry into money. I have a good friend who grew up middle class and married a girl who is very rich. He drives a mercedes to his blue collar job and lives in an 800k house. So on the outside he may seem like he's a snob but he's actually a really cool guy. She's great too.
You can't group everyone by socio economics. Everyone is different and everyone has a story. Stop lumping people into one category because that's how stereotypes are made.. not everyone who has money is evil, AMSS..
It's not what you drive or where you live. It's how you treat everyone else and what you say about those living with less. People, in general, fear those that make less money it seems. The people I find amusing are the ones that grew up modestly but then trash others. No reason for that. Not sure how you read that I think people with money are evil, though.
Besides, authors of the study put the study out there for their peers to review and critique. Plus that study also gives an enumeration of other studies, pro and anti-vouchers, so you can dig even deeper.
Lastly, if you throw around your opinions like vouchers are "fraud", "scam" etc., why don't you provide your own studies to back up your opinion?
We pay private providers plenty of things from our pubic money. At their profit. Take Medicare, for example. And many other examples.
Besides, why is "private" and "profit" such a dirty word? Without it, we wouldn't have social programs. If so, why not schools?
I am confused -- we say "hey look at the world", but now we say "hey don't look at the world!!" Yes, I read the report, plus its 20 pages of tables at the end.
If you go through -- you'll notice that trend is very clear -- in US, most voucher programs (in several cities) have students perform better than traditional school. Yes results may be the same for the 1st or 2nd year, but long term (4 years) or more, most graphs show improvement. It looks like Louisiana's program drags everybody else down. I don't know why.
But that's quarter of my argument. The other quarter is that vouchers perform as well as traditional.
The remaining half of my argument is that charter schools perform same or better, but at the fraction of the cost.
Aren't some people here saying -- city kids perform worse because of (lack of) money?
I didn't say that vouchers are panacea everywhere. Not sure how you got there. What I have been saying is that I like local control, I don't want centralization of education, plus I would like to see options, like charter schools. Above all, I want parents to decide, but they can't decide if society only offers one option -- which is textbook status quo.
So what? Their desire to privatize education is well known, the wages they pay their employees are pathetic, and they thrive off EBT cards and food stamps. Greed is greed.
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.
University of Arkansas???? Arkansas...home of the Walton family...champion supporters of charter schools, school privatization and a few years ago donated millions to UofA to fund an "education reform" department to market their agenda. Enough said. 
