<p>The issue for me is not that he “supports” public schools while sending his kids to private schools, it is that he is some sort of famous spokesperson for a product he chooses not to use. That is hypocrisy to me, and deserves to be exposed.</p>
<p>Riprorin, it’s pretty hard to take anything you say seriously when you use Breitbart as your source. Might as well use Mercola or Jenny McCarthy for something health-related.</p>
<p>My kids went to an inner city Catholic school. A lot of the kids were children of public school teachers.</p>
<p>riprorin is trying to disguise a political agenda with his/her posts. Notice the code words “elitist”, “teacher”, and “union”.</p>
<p>Going on my ignore list.</p>
<p>there are plenty of ways to support public education without using it. Letting public money go to private schools instead of public ones is anti-public education—just because someone does not use it does not mean someone thinks it should be undermined.</p>
<p>(I sent my kids to non-CC-level public schools (they’re Title One now), and they did fine. but I have no problem with anyone choosing otherwise. )</p>
<p>I don’t understand what’s being “exposed” here.</p>
<p>What does it prove that some conservative media source gives you their one or two line summary? More about your willingness to take them at their word.</p>
<p>Geo, sounds to me like this distinction could be based partially on a difference in how one operates in the world, say Myers Briggs thinking (T) versus feeling (F)?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Matt Damon went to public schools.</p>
<p>The article doesn’t mention where in L. A. Damon lives, but I’ll bet dollars to donuts that he lives in Pacific Palisades or somewhere on the Westside. He would not have been sending his kids to school in Boyle Heights or Watts. The publics on the Westside are not bad schools. </p>
<p>Celebrities sending their kids to a private school is another status thing to them, like carrying a $20,000 handbag or driving a Maserati. Many of them didn’t go to college themselves, didn’t do well in high school themselves and aren’t really all that smart. They don’t know how to evaluate quality in a school so they just spend money. Like the handbag or the car, they equate expensive with quality.</p>
<p>The voucher students graduated at a higher rate, OK. But the improvements in test scores (reading only, not math) were not statistically significant.</p>
<p>So here’s my question? We the vouchers awarded randomly to a broad cross section of students within the district, or were they awarded to a subset of those who applied? Of course, we all know the answer. They were awarded to those students whose parents requested them. Of course those students are going to have a higher graduation rate, because those students are the ones who come from families that value education!</p>
<p>My youngest attended a magnet school in the local city the past 2 years, in a not-so-great neighborhood (to the point that many people asked why I would send her to such a school). Test scores overall are not great, and there are many struggling students, but the one advantage those kids have is involved parents. The parents of every child in that school made the affirmative decision to apply. That translates to more involved parents.</p>
<p>If you want to measure whether vouchers work, look at the test scores of both those students who used the vouchers, and of those left behind. If the point is to help a small minority of students, maybe vouchers work. If the point is to help all students by encouraging competition, they don’t work.</p>
<p>Bay, how is he a spokesman? It’s not like he gets paid for supporting one “product” while using another. He said his mom was a teacher, and he supports teachers being paid and treated with respect. Again, where is the hypocrisy?</p>
<p>^^^What TatinG said!^^^ In our area, Catholic schools and evangelical Christian schools are the only alternatives to public education. My sons, who were in Catholic school for religious reasons, had tons of classmates who lived in the best school district in the state (yes, I know, West Virginia, but still …) but their parents sent then to Catholic school for the “snob appeal.” And a lot of them complained when their children were expected to study the Catholic religion and participate at Mass. The family of one of S2’s classmates own the area’s largest newspaper, the most anti-Catholic rag in three states, but when it came time to send their kids to school, they wanted what Catholic schools had to offer.
As far as vouchers go, I don’t favor them. If private and religious schools accepted vouchers they would lose a lot of indepence and self-determination. We sent our sons to Catholic schools because it was our choice and we were willing to pay the price, literally. And in our county, private school children get some services from the school system. S1 went to gifted classes once a week at the neighboring public school, both of them received speech pathology services, and we were provided transportation reimbursement, by state law, in lieu of school bus services. So we did get some of what we paid for.</p>
<p>Here is what the original source [Matt</a> Damon: where did it all go right for the leftwing activist, devoted dad and intelligent action star? | Film | The Guardian](<a href=“http://www.theguardian.com/film/2013/aug/02/matt-damon-activist-star-elysium]Matt”>Matt Damon: where did it all go right for the leftwing activist, devoted dad and intelligent action star? | Matt Damon | The Guardian), wrote about the issue:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It sounds like he, himself saw some inconsistency in his decision.</p>
<p>warbrain,</p>
<p>Where one attends primary school is the parents’ decision, not the child’s.</p>
<p>I have utlitized both public and private schools over the years. I have also volunteered in a public school that none of my children attended. My daughter is a public school teacher. I don’t see the hypocrisy. If Matt Damon, who is a jerk anyway, chooses a different option for his kids, I think that is good parenting. Sending his kids to those particular public school would harm them and do nothing to benefit anyone else. Here in NYC, there are some public schools that are bastions of the wealthy and powerful, and the parents donate huge amounts of money to better the entire schools. I think that’s a great thing. I am also not comfortable with tax funds going to private schools, with the exception of a school nurse. So feel free to call me a hypocrite. I can take it! But I also don’t think money is the issue. As I always say, unless the state wants to take custody of tens of thousands of kids, there is absolutely nothing that money can do to fix the problems with public schools. With the exception of vouchers. I see nothing bad and much good with privately-funded voucher programs tailored to the needs of individual kids. I don’t see that as much different than having the state pay private school tuition for special needs kids.</p>
<p>
How does keeping Brian in a public school that isn’t right for him benefit Betsy whose parents don’t give a darn about her education?</p>
<p>
This is what I think. Public vouchers, I mean.</p>
<p>If a private organization wants to fund scholarships for individual kids based on the criteria of its choice, then that’s absolutely fine with me. But not public funds.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Do you see any hypocrisy in a politician decrying global warming, then driving home in Chevy Suburban?</p>
<p>How about a star advocating for gun control, then starring as a mass-murderer-by machine gun?</p>
<p>How about a vegetarian spokesperson wearing leather shoes?</p>
<p>I see hypocrisy in all of those things. If you cannot live by what you espouse, then shut up!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>DeborahT, I didn’t say anything about thinking either.</p>
<p>Someone I am very close to is a super-wealthy liberal who lives his values and is the embodiment of the good things that the word liberal should mean. A truly honorable, stand-up guy. He chose to send his kids to a public school here and he volunteered hugely, donated six figures or more over the years, and his last child will graduate this year. Unfortunately, the outcome for both kids wasn’t optimal, despite all the enrichment and involvement of the parents, and he is now deeply regretting the choice. I understand why, but find thet whole situation very sad.</p>
<p>Geo, in post #8 you did actually use the word feel, but I’m not trying to say you have to think or feel differently than you do. I simply expressed my own feelings about one of the issues. We don’t have to agree.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>garland, it isn’t about public versus private. It is about finding the best way to educate our children. If public schools don’t do their job, there should be alternative.</p>