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.
Home Schooling "just isn't for the religious" ANYMORE
The reasons have changed.
In December 2008, the U.S. Department of Education's National Center for Education Statistics released estimates on the number of American families homeschooling their children.
The report showed approximately 1.5 million children were being home schooled:
21 percent stated concern about the school environment 17 percent stated dissatisfaction with the academic instruction (Teachers) provided at schools.
Those stating "other" reasons, went from 20 percent in 2003 to 32 percent in 2007, which indicates expansion in the types of demographic groups homeschooling their children.
One private researcher estimates that as many as 2.5 million school-age children were educated at home during the 2007-2008 school year.
Of course this is 2008 data - but it's clear home schooling
is up a lot.
ad hominem attacks? i really thought you were better than that chiel, my mistake. you kinda prove my point though with your unwillingness to even consider the idea that there might be a 3rd way. if we had the courage to allow people to experiment, interesting soluitions might emerge. that however is a concept too far from your institutionaliZed (sorry was educated in 3 different countries and sometimes that comes out in my poor spelling) state of mind.
Where did I say that?
Show me something that works and I'm always willing to look at it.
You haven't done that.
You just said that you want public tax money to go to private schools.
You said that people never think out of the box that they don't know how to since they were educated in the US.
I cried bs on that.
But now I see that you think you've got better ideas than those of us who are uneducated, can't think out of the box people who were schooled in the US.
What ad hominem attacks? The one you just made on me?
You've refused to provide support for any of your opinions and expect us to take it as fact.
That's just not going to happen.
I don't think I agree that public schools need to be abolished, but I do agree with these points that were made. My children entered the public school system last year for the first time in the 6th and 8th grade. An unfortunate consequence of the economy. Man was it a shock! They changed dramatically and it has been a huge effort to keep their heads in the right place. Parent don't realize how much they should be working at home to keep right values and morals deep rooted in their children. Part of the problem with public schools is that parent don't take responsibility once their kids get on the bus. Education should be a partnership between the parents and the school, with parents being held responsible when their kids go to school and act inappropriately.
With that being said, 1) I do agree schools need an effective discipline or consequence plan 2)In my state, a school principle is like a dictator of the school. She/he is not required to heed the advice of anyone not even a supervisor. This is not right. 3) Teachers really should be hired just like any other job. I don't know why tenure is in place. If worked for IBM and produced nothing I would be fired. It should be the same for teachers. At first when I heard what happened in Providence, RI recently where every teacher was fired to help meet the budget I was outraged. However, when I heard the entire story and realized that it was a necessary move to be able to keep the teachers that were the most effective in the class room, I think it was right on. A revamping of these systems really is in order.
So your kids have been in public school for a year. Aren't faring well and it's the teacher/school's fault. Is that what you're saying?
I'll ask you the same question, why should you care where the funds go as long as the student gets a get good education?
Is it about the money or the student? What's more important here?
It's about money, if I'm paying
You now already have Obama's "The Race to the Top program" which is a $4.35 billion fund created under the economic stimulus package (ARRA). It's a grant program where states compete for funds that have initiated reforms linking student performance to teacher evaluations and expanding charter schools. In his budget request for fiscal 2011, President Obama asked for another $1.35 billion expansion of the program.
What's most important in regards to the students, is that
they learn to the best of their abilities This notion that
pouring more dollars makes scholars is ludicrous.
But, more important than any of that:
Vouchers create MORE levels of government. Allowing government to intrude on Private and Church Schools.
Vouchers is just another name for another entitlement program
The notion that every student is entitled to an amount of money based on what per pupil expenditure is ridiculous. The dollar amount per pupil is arrived at by total spent E.g. Salaries, books, every expenditure in the budget - and dividing it by the number of students. It's not representative of an actually amount to be put/given to individual student/parent accounts.
If you want your child to have a PRIVATE education
pay for it yourself. Simple concept.
You now already have Obama's "The Race to the Top program" which is a $4.35 billion fund created under the economic stimulus package (ARRA). It's a grant program where states compete for funds that have initiated reforms linking student performance to teacher evaluations and expanding charter schools. In his budget request for fiscal 2011, President Obama asked for another $1.35 billion expansion of the program.
We don't need the feds involved with this, cut all the federal programs. Let the states collect and disburse the taxes. If you're creating an environment where schools are competing for funds they have no choice but to perform well, the need for regualtions and standards becomes far less. Poorly performing schools will be eliminated through attrition.
Quote:
This notion that
pouring more dollars makes scholars is ludicrous.
I'd agree and I'm not suggesting we spend more, I'm suggesting we change how we spend it.
The voucher program has given new life to venerable Catholic and Lutheran schools in the city, and has spurred the creation of dozens of new schools - many of them religious - that rely solely on voucher students. All told, about 70 percent of the voucher schools are religious.
So were subsidizing religious indoctrination now
Wonderful
We don't need the feds involved with this, cut all the federal programs. Let the states collect and disburse the taxes. If you're creating an environment where schools are competing for funds they have no choice but to perform well, the need for regualtions and standards becomes far less. Poorly performing schools will be eliminated through attrition.
I'd agree and I'm not suggesting we spend more, I'm suggesting we change how we spend it.
Then we are in agreement - Get rid of the Department
of Education and let the States decide
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.
