Public education

[Guest tiki_gods]

We just had HB 1707 that would have allowed a voucher system in the state of NH but the focking liberals killed it. Why are people so opposed to a voucher system to send your kids to other schools if your local school system sucks? I think competition is a good thing and if your school district loses money because people tuition their kids out then they should get their act together and fix the problems.

[Giants Fan 85]

Maybe you should earn more, so you can put your kid in private school. Let the market for a quality education dictate who can and can't afford it. But if your kid isn't already testing into AP classes ... well ... you decide where to spend the money, but a good education aint cheap, and college is getting more competitive, and a lot more expensive.

[Riddlen 1]

We just had HB 1707 that would have allowed a voucher system in the state of NH but the focking liberals killed it. Why are people so opposed to a voucher system to send your kids to other schools if your local school system sucks? I think competition is a good thing and if your school district loses money because people tuition their kids out then they should get their act together and fix the problems.

casue it will make the bad schools worse. That tends to be the argument I hear atleast. dunno if its true, I have no real strong opinion either way. I think the teachers hate it too...

[Guest tiki_gods]

casue it will make the bad schools worse. That tends to be the argument I hear atleast. dunno if its true, I have no real strong opinion either way. I think the teachers hate it too...

 

Bad schools worse because less money goes into them if people send their kids else where? From what I've read, under No Child Left Behind, bad schools will be forced to shut down if they fail to make annual yearly progress anyway. Not 100% sure of that but I'm pretty sure that is the case.

[Riddlen 1]

Bad schools worse because less money goes into them if people send their kids else where? From what I've read, under No Child Left Behind, bad schools will be forced to shut down if they fail to make annual yearly progress anyway. Not 100% sure of that but I'm pretty sure that is the case.

also, no child left behind is a good concept on paper, but teachers hate it as well. It forces curriculum and in many cases its not developmentally appropriate but they have to teach it anyway so the kids can hit the metrics laid out by the program.

[Guest tiki_gods]

also, no child left behind is a good concept on paper, but teachers hate it as well. It forces curriculum and in many cases its not developmentally appropriate but they have to teach it anyway so the kids can hit the metrics laid out by the program.

 

I don't understand why there isn't a standard curriculum taught. Each school district, it seems, teaches whatever it wants. Makes no sense to me.

[Riddlen 1]

I don't understand why there isn't a standard curriculum taught. Each school district, it seems, teaches whatever it wants. Makes no sense to me.

there has always been standards and guidlelines, they have just gotten much more specific wit no child left behind

[Guest tiki_gods]

there has always been standards and guidlelines, they have just gotten much more specific wit no child left behind

 

but when you have a student move from one school to another, they taught ancient civ in 6th grade in district A and ancient civ in 7th in district B. That kid basically received two years of ancient civ and no us history....

 

I think the reigns need to be tightened up.

[Ilov80s 0]

As a senior in Special Education, I have a few off hand comments:

 

Here is one problem with creating standardized curriculum:

In Michigan, the only required class is civics. Say, the state of Michigan now required Algebra, Geometry, Biology, Physics, and Literature. What happens to children in special education who a. don't have ability to pass the classes and b. would have little use of these classes in their adult life? Currently, students with special needs take classes more driven towards vocational training, social skills, and life skills so that as adults they have a the best oppurtunity possible to be independant and self-supportive. A national curric. would either doom these students or create the need for 2 alternative secondary education programs: college bound and work force bound. That would require a complete reworking the of education system model in this country (which is not necessarily a bad idea).

 

Some people don't like the idea of more government control. So much of what is taught in history classes is watered down, one-sided BS already, I don't know if it could get much worse- but a national curriculum woudn't help.

 

The concept of NCLB is great: teachers need to be accountable because there are so many terrible teachers. Honestly, 2/3 of the teachers I have worked with were bad. The methods they used fly in the face of everything I am being taught in college. I attend Eastern Michigan, which is the leading education institute in the nation, and luckily there are a lot of teachers coming of there that are IMO better qualified to teach then the majority of teachers with tenure.

 

That being said, there are some big problems with NCLB. It does not provide the funding or the framework to improve the public school system and is IMO, setting up the creation of privately run schools. It may bring down the public school system. Florida reported that 87% of its schools have failed to make adequate yearly progress. Congress found that within a decade 70% of the nation's schools will be facing escalated sanctions. HTH

[pingpong 0]

We just had HB 1707 that would have allowed a voucher system in the state of NH but the focking liberals killed it. Why are people so opposed to a voucher system to send your kids to other schools if your local school system sucks? I think competition is a good thing and if your school district loses money because people tuition their kids out then they should get their act together and fix the problems.

Have you read Freakenomics yet? It raises compelling data about how school choice does very little to make a child's education actually better. In short, those kids that opt to take advantage of school choice by selecting a different school score statistically the same on tests, whether they got into the better school, or did not get into the better school due to high demand for that school. Basically, the fact that they wanted a better school showed parental involvement and a commitment to education, which is the real difference between higher test scores, not the physical location of the school they attend.

[brinett9 0]

Could I please have a voucher for not driving on the public roads?

 

Just a thousand a year or so would cover it.

[RLLD 3,455]

We have the kids in public, but are on the waiting list for entry into a local private school right now. It will likely cost me 17k per year for the first kid, then I get a slight break when the second enters, and a little more for the third.

 

You have to be careful with the private schools though, they dont have the same regulation as public. Some private schools have teachers without 4-year degrees or teching certs, oddly enough they are the affordable ones.

 

Deciding on the right one takes time and effort, lots of it...

[Strike 3,975]

As a senior in Special Education, I have a few off hand comments:

 

Here is one problem with creating standardized curriculum:

In Michigan, the only required class is civics. Say, the state of Michigan now required Algebra, Geometry, Biology, Physics, and Literature. What happens to children in special education who a. don't have ability to pass the classes and b. would have little use of these classes in their adult life? Currently, students with special needs take classes more driven towards vocational training, social skills, and life skills so that as adults they have a the best oppurtunity possible to be independant and self-supportive. A national curric. would either doom these students or create the need for 2 alternative secondary education programs: college bound and work force bound. That would require a complete reworking the of education system model in this country (which is not necessarily a bad idea).

 

Some people don't like the idea of more government control. So much of what is taught in history classes is watered down, one-sided BS already, I don't know if it could get much worse- but a national curriculum woudn't help.

 

The concept of NCLB is great: teachers need to be accountable because there are so many terrible teachers. Honestly, 2/3 of the teachers I have worked with were bad. The methods they used fly in the face of everything I am being taught in college. I attend Eastern Michigan, which is the leading education institute in the nation, and luckily there are a lot of teachers coming of there that are IMO better qualified to teach then the majority of teachers with tenure.

 

That being said, there are some big problems with NCLB. It does not provide the funding or the framework to improve the public school system and is IMO, setting up the creation of privately run schools. It may bring down the public school system. Florida reported that 87% of its schools have failed to make adequate yearly progress. Congress found that within a decade 70% of the nation's schools will be facing escalated sanctions. HTH

 

You are very well spoken for a special ed student. You may have been misdiagnosed.

[kilroy69 994]

Michigan is a shcool of choice state and I chink that should be the way it is.

[hoytdwow 202]

I don't understand why there isn't a standard curriculum taught.

Because this isn't China?

[Jeremy 0]

Have you read Freakenomics yet? It raises compelling data about how school choice does very little to make a child's education actually better. In short, those kids that opt to take advantage of school choice by selecting a different school score statistically the same on tests, whether they got into the better school, or did not get into the better school due to high demand for that school. Basically, the fact that they wanted a better school showed parental involvement and a commitment to education, which is the real difference between higher test scores, not the physical location of the school they attend.

 

Good post. A lot of people don't realize just how important parental involvement is in a kids educations. It's much more important than even the quality of the teachers or schools. They've done study after study and every one comes back with the same conclusion. The #1 factor in student achievement is parental involvement.

[Toro 1]

Teachers should be the secondary resource in your child's education. You should be the first. Unless you are too focking stupid.

[Patriotsfatboy1 1,432]

NCLB is a joke. The problem is that the Federal Government dictates the standards, but provides no mechanism for funding it. With many of the cutbacks at the State and Federal levels, towns have to meet that burden solely with local tax revenues.

 

Voucher systems can help individuals short term in that it gives you options to provide better education to your children. However, in the long run it will cause the poorer areas to have less funding and will eventually give rise to greater disparities between the "haves" and "have nots". One other thing to consider is that many of the good schools will not want the voucher money because it will place a burden on them that was higher than expected in the first place. You will see schools that will close the doors to outside students. Happened in MA with "School Choice".

 

I also would not want to have an overly unbalanced funding situation where poorer schools receive an inordinate amount of funding to get them up to speed. This has been the "libs" approach in the past and it has caused problems where the poor areas receive all of the funding leaving the middle-class to fend for themselves. You need more balance, better accountability, and you need to have realistic funding for these programs.

[Voltaire 4,559]

I intend to homeschool my kids (when I have them) but I have three reasons for that.

 

1) I'm a first rate teacher and have far higher standards than any school anywhere

2) I live in China and don't trust their schools

3) I can pull it off

[Korben Dallas 0]

I've spouted off about Vouchers and NCLB countless times. But here's the short version.

 

 

School Vouchers- The problem is that the exiting students take their allocated money with them. Good for the student, bad for the already underfunded school. Imaginary bloated budgets aside, that money goes for hiring teachers, facilities, special educaton, and activities. If the goal is to improve the failing schools, then cutting the money they need to do that seems counter-intuitive.

 

Second, the voucher system creates a brain drain. The kid still has to get IN to the private school and there is no incentive for privates to take any but the cream of the crop. The average student gets left in a school that now offers less.

 

Third, There has thus far been no rule about who can "use" the vouchers. One of the first problems that I cannot believe no one figured out is that all the folks with their kids already going to private schools requested the vouchers. The example I saw was of this private school that cost $25K hired an administrator to help with the paperwork that the parents just had to sign. They didn't allow any new children in, just got themselves an extra $6000 per student from the state.

 

Fourth, While everyone glamourizes private schools now, not all of them are that great. And if a profit can be made, count on plenty of new "schools" popping. Without requiring standards (which they can't do). This can become a huge problem.

 

 

NCLB

1. Lets start with the fact that this is largely an unfunded $6 BILLION dollar mandate. Which means that the states and locals have to pick up the tab.

2. Testing is a joke across the board. Besides that it takes 7 curriculum days out, the NCLB funding problem means many of those days are unpaid. Plus adding the days to "teacher to the test". 7 to 20 days no big deal, think about what 3 section of biology out to be cut out, or geometry, or history (maybe WW2-that wasn't very important).

3. The foundation of NCLB came from the superintendent in Houston, who became the Dept. of Ed head. Turns out that he has falsified most of the studies he used to claim success by "hiding" and "expelling" students the week that the count takes place.

I could add about 50 more reasons, but those should be enough...

 

I also would not want to have an overly unbalanced funding situation where poorer schools receive an inordinate amount of funding to get them up to speed. This has been the "libs" approach in the past and it has caused problems where the poor areas receive all of the funding leaving the middle-class to fend for themselves. You need more balance, better accountability, and you need to have realistic funding for these programs.

 

Amen, I'm not sure its been the lib's approach as much as education's response to funding cuts and trying to meet ADA and Civil Rights mandates in the face of them.

[Voltaire 4,559]

I'm all about vouchers.

 

Let the public schools swim or drown. If a sh*tty schools shuts down, great. let the good schools get the money and let the kids get taught in the good schools.

 

Public schools won't let certain peple tach, but they can't fire crappy teachers with tenure .F*ck 'em let the kids go where they can be taught better and let public schools figure out how to not lose kids. Force them to do a good job.

[Korben Dallas 0]

I'm all about vouchers.

 

Let the public schools swim or drown. If a sh*tty schools shuts down, great. let the good schools get the money and let the kids get taught in the good schools.

 

Public schools won't let certain peple tach, but they can't fire crappy teachers with tenure .F*ck 'em let the kids go where they can be taught better and let public schools figure out how to not lose kids. Force them to do a good job.

 

Interesting. Vouchers won't do any of that.

 

If a sh*tty schools shuts down, great. let the good schools get the money and let the kids get taught in the good schools.

No, if the shitty school shuts down> then the kids that didn't have high enough test scores will either have NO WHERE to go to school or will be forcing into the remaining district schools. Only the kids the private school accepts will be out of that hell.

 

Public schools won't let certain peple tach, but they can't fire crappy teachers with tenure.

I have no idea what this means, you mean without a teaching certificate? Seems having some rules for handing those out is a good idea. You can certainly fire crappy teachers, just with due process.

 

F*ck 'em let the kids go where they can be taught better

But that isn't what happens, only a few of them get that. The rest are left in a worse sh1thole. That is, if the kids already in private schools don't gut all the money.

 

and let public schools figure out how to not lose kids.

Yes, very compelling. Make school a profit motive based institution. Then take all the money out, how might that be considered competitive?

[Strike 3,975]

Yes, very compelling. Make school a profit motive based institution. Then take all the money out, how might that be considered competitive?

 

Allowing for competition by having public schools have to compete against the private sector for education dollars is not a bad idea. As it is anyone not satisfied with public education has to pay TWICE for their children's education, once in the form of taxes that fund the public school and a second time if they choose to send their child to a private school. Vouchers simply allow that person to choose where THEIR education tax dollars get spent. I see no problem with that.

[Voltaire 4,559]

Can I use vouchers on my homeschooled kids. (when I ... er ... actually have kids to homeschool that is)

[Korben Dallas 0]

Allowing for competition by having public schools have to compete against the private sector for education dollars is not a bad idea. As it is anyone not satisfied with public education has to pay TWICE for their children's education, once in the form of taxes that fund the public school and a second time if they choose to send their child to a private school. Vouchers simply allow that person to choose where THEIR education tax dollars get spent. I see no problem with that.

 

 

I do. As citizens of a state, they pay taxes some of which goes to the free education system, everyone does. In turn, they enjoy the fruits of that system whether they attend or not, even if they don't directly participate. If the parents then freely choose to not act on their money and send their kids to private school, thats their own business.

 

I don't drive on the new highway they are building in Western Nebraska, but that doesn't entitle me to request my portion of roads money to fix potholes in my town.

[brinett9 0]

I've never had a house fire.

 

Could I please have a voucher for Fire Department services?

[Korben Dallas 0]

Can I use vouchers on my homeschooled kids. (when I ... er ... actually have kids to homeschool that is)

 

 

Sure! Since the real purpose behind all of this is the elimination of free public schooling, I don't see why we don't stop pretending that were trying to improve education for our citizenry and just hand out all the money in the form of tax breaks.

 

Theocratic Dark Ages! Here we come!

[Strike 3,975]

I do. As citizens of a state, they pay taxes some of which goes to the free education system, everyone does. In turn, they enjoy the fruits of that system whether they attend or not, even if they don't directly participate. If the parents then freely choose to not act on their money and send their kids to private school, thats their own business.

 

I don't drive on the new highway they are building in Western Nebraska, but that doesn't entitle me to request my portion of roads money to fix potholes in my town.

 

We'll just have to agree to disagree then. I think one thing we can agree on is that vouchers are a reaction to the degradation of public education. One thing I'm happy about - as of now my high school is still one of the best in the state, public or not. I hope that never changes.

[Ilov80s 0]

You are very well spoken for a special ed student. You may have been misdiagnosed.

 

Very funny

[brinett9 0]

I don't have any kids, nor do I plan to.

 

Where are my vouchers?

[Toro 1]

I think one thing we can agree on is that vouchers are a reaction to the degradation of public education.

 

This is because the government (local, state and federal) have repeatedly shown that they are unresponsible and unable to do things in a fiscally responsible manner. The government should set policy on testing and accreditation, leave the education and budgets to the private sector.

[Guest xmann]

Competition is good. Bad schools will be forced to get better or close down instead of us (tax payers) pouring more good more after bad.

 

The ONLY reason this is getting defeated at the polls is because the Teacher's Union, the post powerful and well orginized union in the nation (passed the auto workers and construction guys years ago) has a lot to lose and is completely against any competition to their monopoly! If bad schools were forced to shut down, bad teachers would be out of work!

[Patriotsfatboy1 1,432]

I don't have any kids, nor do I plan to.

 

Where are my vouchers?

 

It is funny. There are many people who feel this way. To those people, I ask "where do you think that increase in your home value comes from?". One of the key factors in increases in real estate is the quality of the local school systems. People without children benefit from those schools even if you do not have kids in school by increases in your home value.

 

Before I had kids, I understood this and supported the local schools (within reason). Now that I have kids, I will hopefully get some of that money back.

[brinett9 0]

It is funny. There are many people who feel this way. To those people, I ask "where do you think that increase in your home value comes from?". One of the key factors in increases in real estate is the quality of the local school systems. People without children benefit from those schools even if you do not have kids in school by increases in your home value.

 

Before I had kids, I understood this and supported the local schools (within reason). Now that I have kids, I will hopefully get some of that money back.

Sure, but is it an effective way to improve the local schools by taking money out of the school budget for vouchers?

[Guest xmann]

This is because the government (local, state and federal) have repeatedly shown that they are unresponsible and unable to do things in a fiscally responsible manner. The government should set policy on testing and accreditation, leave the education and budgets to the private sector.

 

Yeah, The guys at TYCO, WORLDCOM, ENRON, ARTHUR ANDERSON, etc...showed us how responsible the "private sector" is! I would rather have the government waste my money then some scum bag CEO STEAL it!

[brinett9 0]

Yeah, The guys at TYCO, WORLDCOM, ENRON, ARTHUR ANDERSON, etc...showed us how responsible the "private sector" is! I would rather have the government waste my money then some scum bag CEO STEAL it!

You're forgetting the shining example the church has set with its care of children.

[Korben Dallas 0]

Competition is good. Bad schools will be forced to get better or close down instead of us (tax payers) pouring more good more after bad.

 

The ONLY reason this is getting defeated at the polls is because the Teacher's Union, the post powerful and well orginized union in the nation (passed the auto workers and construction guys years ago) has a lot to lose and is completely against any competition to their monopoly! If bad schools were forced to shut down, bad teachers would be out of work!

You didn't read this thread.

 

And the Teachers Unions aren't even a top 10 reason. Except that they see the simple math that explains what a stupid idea this is.

 

Schools can't be a monopoly fool. They don't generate income, they have competition in both private and other public districts, and they have publc oversight. No wonder these stupid ideas take root.

[Ilov80s 0]

Yeah, The guys at TYCO, WORLDCOM, ENRON, ARTHUR ANDERSON, etc...showed us how responsible the "private sector" is! I would rather have the government waste my money then some scum bag CEO STEAL it!

 

Which is why, if you want your children to get a good education, you better get involved.

[phillybear 364]

I am strongly in favor of banning all education, and having kids raised in the forest by packs of coyotes.

[Toro 1]

Yeah, The guys at TYCO, WORLDCOM, ENRON, ARTHUR ANDERSON, etc...showed us how responsible the "private sector" is! I would rather have the government waste my money then some scum bag CEO STEAL it!

 

It would be treated exacly like the utilities are. They are able to make a certain profit and that is it. Everything else is regulated.