<p>
</p>
<p>I thought one of the arguments against vouchers was that they will remove the best and brightest from the public schools, leaving them in a worse condition. Does this not also happen when people send their kids to private schools?</p>
<p>“I partially agree w/ your argument, which is why politicians who do not support ‘school choice’ should be the first to keep THEIR children in the public schools.”</p>
<p>I don’t see why politicians who are against the defunding public schools by a voucher system should have to send their children to public school. They are still paying their fair share to their districts schools.</p>
<p>"I thought one of the arguments against vouchers was that they will remove the best and brightest from the public schools, leaving them in a worse condition. Does this not also happen when people send their kids to private schools? "</p>
<p>That’s not my argument. It’s the defunding of these schools is, imo, what will leave them in worst condition. </p>
<p>We need to fund universal pre-K, pay teachers a lot more, increase the school year and get rid of NCLB and these take more money not less.</p>
<p>How does evaluating teacher quality figure into your plan?</p>
<p>Emiliebee, when students have a choice, the failed schools will either get better or they will disappear. What’s wrong with that?</p>
<p>Competion benefits everyone, except the teacher’s union perhaps and those that are grifting off the system.</p>
<p>Voucher or other forms of choice are meant o allow at-will choice. It is not about some young kid who’s already a genius. Not about some left-field complaint about privates. It’s about choice. It’s not about rich folks getting a discount or poor kids leaving peers to rot in the present system. It’s about making choice functional, where the alternative is cast in concrete and not functional.</p>
<p>Lots of misconceptions swirling. Again. Why? I don’t believe the mocking questions posed are meant to educate the asker or round out understanding for the group. Just to mock. Because you “can.” Why not just go change the system? The very question indicates a lack of understanding and engagement. </p>
<p>I worked for the formation of an improved school, both my kids have years of working within the system to support students and one was set to spend the upcoming year directly and full-time in the local school system. Hmm, but someone else can find a Malkin commentary (has she been involved?) or insists some other media report is the ultimate authority. How so? </p>
<p>Yes, a bit of a rant.</p>
<p>lf,</p>
<p>If you are going to rant, I’d like to request that you be more specific. What “misconceptions” are you referring to? Which “mocking” questions?" Where is the “lack of understanding and engagement?”</p>
<p>Without more specificity, your rants come across as critical without providing value.</p>
<p>Bay, sorry but your standard answer to me is: I don’t see it.</p>
<p>I have no problem with what Matt Damon did. Would it be better if he sent his kids to private school and DID NOT advocate and promote support for public schools?</p>
<p>It’s not being a hypocrite, it’s making a personal choice about what’s best for your kids, and working to improve what exists elsewhere.</p>
<p>
This was my (somewhat facetious) point–but isn’t the OP’s beef (and the beef of all the other right-wing folks trying to stir up this issue) that Damon has actually done a lot more than that for public education? He’s been an advocate, appeared in a documentary, etc. If he had just made a comment in an interview, the hounds wouldn’t be baying.</p>
<p>As for vouchers, if they don’t pay the full cost of the private education, it’s pretty obvious that those most in need of better schools will be left behind. Would those of you who support vouchers support a system in which only the very poorest people can get them? Wouldn’t that be the very best way to improve the public schools? Or would you support housing vouchers to allow those poor people to move into nicer neighborhoods?</p>
<p>“Care to respond to my post on why you support a failed a public education system while sending your own kids to private schools?”</p>
<p>I believe I did answer this question, but if I was unclear, let me say it again. I supported the system as a classroom volunteer, a PTA president, worked on tax bonds, auctions and donated $ to said auctions, and sat on a site council. </p>
<p>After years of advocating for my children’s academic needs in their K-8 schools, writing grants for programs benefitting all kids, begging & pleading for classes, working with the principal, it was quite clear the high school can not accommodate their needs in this small rural community. We chose to send them to a private school 40 miles from home and they happily agreed. </p>
<p>We continue to support our local schools because I believe in an educated populace. Not every child has the level of need my kids do. I’d say the school is adequately serving 50 - 65% of their population. </p>
<p>I don’t believe in vouchers because it takes $ from the already failing districts. We don’t receive tax break for our private school tuition and don’t expect one.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I have trouble with your cryptic way of saying things, yes. As we’ve learned on other threads, people have a way of “hearing what they want to hear,” in a thread, and making accusations about comments that were never actually made. I think this is unfair and unproductive. I am asking for clarification of your comments, because you are right, I don’t see it.</p>
<p>“Emiliebee, when students have a choice, the failed schools will either get better or they will disappear. What’s wrong with that?”</p>
<p>Because the mission of our public school system as a nation is too important to allow it to fail. I am for improving the public school system, not dismantling it.</p>
<p>We do use taxes (and other financial methods) to encourage private behavior that we (collectively through our government) think is valuable. Thus, for example, many of you are getting a tax break on your mortgages–on my dime–because we think private home ownership is a good thing.</p>
<p>The question, then, is: is it a good thing for as many people as possible to leave the public schools and go to private schools? Not in my book. I think strong public schools are vital to promote good citizenship. Perhaps this is partly because I come from a part of the country–and a time–when many private schools were created for a (to me) highly unpatriotic reason–to preserve racial segregation. I’m sorry to say that there are some private schools now that serve to divide Americans from one another as well. I don’t want to encourage them. And I don’t know of any way to separate them from schools that just do a better job of educating kids.</p>
<p>emilybee - closing the “bad” schools will not dismantle the whole system. The good schools will absorb - new good schools will open and borderline schools will adjust and get better. We DO have schools that should be CLOSED. They aren’t many, but they do exist.</p>
<p>Closing them will STRENGTHEN the system. Like pruning a rose bush.</p>
<p>I’m not necessarily for open vouchers (private and public). I’m for a system by which children from one public school district or school can choose to go to another by voucher.</p>
<p>
This was something that I asserted, but I meant it more as a problem with evaluating the system than anything else. Like this:</p>
<p>Step 1: “The public schools are failing! Let’s offer vouchers!”
Step 2: Vouchers are offered to all, but only used by students who pass certain academic standards and whose parents can and will handle the remaining costs.
Step 3: Individual test scores remain the same for individual students, but the schools are now credited for slightly different student bodies.
Step 4: “The public schools are getting worse! MORE VOUCHERS!” Go back to step 1, lowering academic standards and/or increasing funding, and repeat.</p>
<p>I think that there are solutions that lie within the public sphere that will improve the situation without introducing the negatives that come along with much private schooling.</p>
<p>*“Emiliebee, when students have a choice, the failed schools will either get better or they will disappear. What’s wrong with that?” *</p>
<p>The reality is that it is being dismantled through lack of funding. I covered schools and school boards for many years as a fledgling reporter. And it’s always the same story. Lack of funding. There will be no change until we as a society value education and insist on proper funding.</p>
<p>The elementary school my kids’ attended was more successful than most, including those affluent schools in a nearby large city. Was this because of bloated budgets and high paid teachers? No. It was due to size. </p>
<p>It was a rare gem in a sea of 800 plus elementary schools and the difference was huge. The school has the same issues the others do with hungry kids, inattentive parents, ELL. But we were able to address 99% of these because it’s a small community. </p>
<p>Inappropriate behavior was dealt with immediately. Kids were hungry in the morning? We raised money and every child received a breakfast snack every morning, for years. Spanish only speakers? The other kids helped their peers learn english. </p>
<p>This is how all schools should be. But lack of funding makes this impossible.</p>
<p>There are some, such as older adults, who volunteer in public schools. However, they are carefully vetted and this takes time and money, so they are selective in taking volunteers these days.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>So do I. Ensuring that every student has a good teacher is my proposed solution. I don’t think anything else really matters.</p>
<p>
But they add a lot of value and do wonderful things. It is a good option.</p>