(03-12-2009 06:34 PM)I45owl Wrote: (03-12-2009 01:42 PM)Hambone10 Wrote: I45Owl Wrote: (03-12-2009 06:36 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote: Two, isn't it a bigger problem that a rather large subset of kids is trapped in an education system that offers them little hope, and from which they cannot escape?
Provided that you can demonstrate that the situation for that rather large subset of kids would be improved. But, you're advocating a system that would spend over $300 billion based on the assertion that things would be better and an expressed disregard for any kind of evidence one way or the other.
If I understand things correctly, it would only redirect $300byn already being spent, not create $300byn in new spending. As for evidence... I don't think there is any doubt that private schools... not charter schools, but private schools do a better job of educating our youth. Ask any college admissions director. I've been told that some schools are worth as many as 2 points of GPA (on just a 5 point scale) over their public school counterparts... and because vouchers provide choices, as opposed to simply "alternatives"... the people directly affected by the educational opportunities get to make a choice.
Yes, in theory you're redirecting that amount of funding. I have heard the opposite about private schools as well.
There are two rebuttals I'll make to what your anecdotes.
First, any school (or any coach by way of comparison) has a vested interest in saying that the school that you came for was crap and we're so much better that you'll have to work really hard to get up to our level, especially when they're charging you for attendance.
Second, I'll assert that every school that has a large percentage of kids who are high achievers will wind up with well qualified students. That's why there were so many kids at Rice that went to high school in Los Alamos, NM. The numbers for kids that attend high $$ private schools are going to be good for the same reason. The public high school that I went to in Denver should be counted 2 points ahead of most other schools as well.
The question with regards to public policy and public monies should be whether public or private schools are more cost effective.
The opposite? not following... you mean that some private schools are worth LESS than their public alternatives? I'm certain its possible... but if that is the case, then why are people PAYING for a worse product than they can have for free? Now, if your asserting that Fairfax County Public schools are better than many Bug-tussle USA private schools... that's fine.... but Fairfax County Schools aren't an option for the people in Bug-tussle.
to your first point... that isn't what was said. What was said was, when talking to a college admissions director in Texas... a state where the top 10% of a school... regardless of how poor the school is... is guaranteed admission to state schools... and considering whether or not to accept admission for my son at a Private School... I asked if having a 5.0 at Bellaire High School (one of the better public schools in the state) was better than having a 4.0 at Kinkaid High School (one of the better private schools)... and I was told that while the bump for Kinkaid over Bellaire was not as much as MANY HISD schools, there was a meaningful bump.... and that for some schools in HISD and neighboring districts, the bump was as much as 2 points. Meaning getting straight B's in regular classes at Kinkaid was equivalent in their minds to getting Straight A's in all honors classes at some Public schools in or near Houston.
This had nothing to do with "selling" me anything.
as to point 2, if you believe that your school district is fine, then I would agree that most people who chose alternative schooling do so on the basis of something OTHER than education... but I think it's a pretty well established fact that MOST school districts are failing our kids... and that MOST private schools are better than their public alternatives in their location... so you are in the minority.
Quote: (03-12-2009 01:42 PM)Hambone10 Wrote: I-45, to be fair... it is YOU who has implied that vouchers are simply an attempt to fund religious schools... or for white kids to get away from black ones... Honestly, those are ficticious claims not supported by the evidence and much more insulting than anything 69/70 might have implied.
I do recall saying that there were two primary constituencies advocating school vouchers - religious and libertarian. I don't think you will find people openly advocating school vouchers as a method of segregation today, but interestingly:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_vouchers#History Wrote:School vouchers were used in the 1960s after school integration by some Southern states in the U.S. as a method of perpetuating segregation. In a few instances, public schools were closed outright and vouchers were issued to parents. The vouchers, in many cases, were only good at privately segregated schools, known as segregation academies.
The libertarian perspective is mostly what's been advocated here, and provides the basis for the system:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_vouchers#History Wrote:Nobel Prize winning economist Milton Friedman argued for the modern concept of vouchers in the 1950s, stating that competition would improve schools and cost efficiency. The view further gained popularity with the 1980 TV broadcast of Friedman's series "Free to Choose" for which volume 6 was devoted entirely to promoting "educational freedom" through programs like school vouchers.[2] Vouchers have since been introduced in countries all over the world but are controversial as they reflect political and ideological splits as well as limiting the role of unions in education.
In looking for links to support the religious aspect of school choice, I think I've found that I may have greatly overestimated its importance - primarily for these reasons:
- Advocacy groups from secularists to the ADL play this aspect very strongly
- Experience in following the issues of church-state separation for a long time have left me with the impression that the primary movers are Evangelicals unhappy with church-state separation
- My baseless and apparently false assumption that one of the primary funders of voucher proposals - Patrick Byrne - did so for religious reasons (based on the fact that he's from Utah), whereas it appears he's a staunch Libertarian
- School voucher programs in Cleveland (and presumably elsewhere) have been challenged and/or quashed by church-state litigation
Catholic Leaders Lobby for School Vouchers in N.J.
http://catholiceducation.org/articles/ed...ed0315.htm Wrote:Ultimately, however, the Catholic community alone may not be able to solve its schools’ problems. “It’s an open question whether inner-city Catholic schools are viable without vouchers or other forms of government aid,” acknowledges Guerra. The consortium schools, it’s important to note, received a substantial financial boost in 2004, when Congress passed a limited school-voucher bill for the District of Columbia. The bill allowed 400 poor students from failing D.C. public schools to transfer into the consortium schools, with vouchers paying full tuition.
I think enough things have changed since 1960 that we don't need to assume that the reasons for what happened then apply to even a significant minority today... and while the Catholic Community certainly has an interest in their schools... and would be supportive of vouchers... it is clear from THIS comment that they aren't discriminating... and though they have mass etc... I doubt if those 400 families are all Catholic.
More important... The church offers you a 3 course meal, but you have to wear a tie they give you and listen to a sermon while you eat. The state offers you a cheese sandwich, but you don't have to wear a tie or listen to a sermon... though a politician may stick their head in for a photo op... You choose. Either way, you're not starving. I fail to see how offering you a choice hurts you... even if the choice comes with strings.
Quote: (03-12-2009 01:42 PM)Hambone10 Wrote: Additionally, you've failed to produce evidence that the removal of students to alternative schools of their choice... and the opportunity for literally EVERY student, regardless of race, creed or color to get the "free to them" education offered by the state, or the "free to them" $7,500 education supplied through the voucher is worse than the current system.
I don't believe I've made that argument, so I don't see why I have a burden of supplying evidence for it.
You said that you'd agree with vouchers "Provided that you can demonstrate that the situation for that rather large subset of kids would be improved." My alternative to that is because I am only "generally" redirecting funds, rather than spending new money... I only need to demonstrate that I can improve ONE child's situation for it to be worthwhile... and I believe you'd agree that vouchers could help ONE student... because there is little evidence to suggest that the quality of education for those who choose NOT to use the voucher would be lessened.
I still go back to your own example. Only a few of the schools you visited in Dallas offer (in your mind) a superior education to your free choice.... and they are too expensive, and others may be reasonably priced, but not (again in your opinion) worth the differential. Obviously, many other people came to different conclusions for a variety of reasons. You focus on the increase in demand that would be caused by the availability of vouchers and assume a dollar for dollar increase in cost... which is unlikely, but fail to recognize the increase in quality or supply that would also result. You may not change your mind, but clearly others might... because they've already looked at the same choices you did, and made different decisions.
MY point is that if you establish a voucher as being worth $7,500... that a significant number of alternative schools with a price point of $7,500 will appear. If enough people don't generally agree that a particular school is worth $7,500, then that school will go under...
I don't know where the money for those DC vouchers came from... so its not a fair question... but the school in DC existed before the vouchers. The choice for those 400 families did not. Obviously those families believe they are better off with the voucher... and the school certainly doesn't seem to mind. I'm looking for evidence of harm to others because the evidence of "good" is so obvious. If the DC Public school system was harmed, then the voucher wasn't priced correctly....
Every time i hear of a charter school or private school that fails, I am sad for the kids that made the choice to attend that school... however, as their alternative to the charter or private school is the same public school they would have gone to had they not been offered the choice in the first place, they REALLY aren't harmed.