Byron Jeff wrote: > Those taxes paid are not specifically for your child. What about DINKs who > have no kids at all? They still pay and get no specific benefit for those > funds. The DINKs do not care whether the money is spent at a private or a public school. > The public school funds are for the benefit of the entire society, not > just > specifically for you. So paying them are orthogonal to paying for tuition. Sorry, but the argument is absurd. You are saying that if I decide to transfer my child to a private school, I deprive the society of the benefit. > [...] Private schools cherry pick students. That's why they are > exclusive and successful. I don't know where you get the idea that private schools "cherry pick" their students. I believe private schools are successful because they have a strong incentive to be successful. And AFAIK, their entrance exams aren't as "exclusive" as you make it sound, it certainly doesn't take a genius to pass them. > My whole point is that if you want to transfer public funds to private > institutions, then those private institutions have to play by the same > rules as the public ones. There are actually two ways to achive a level playing field: 1. Put the same burdens that are born by public schools, on private schools. 2. Remove the burdens. I am saying, get rid of the restrictions. > Then you'll have a truly free educational > economy. Not with the restrictions you won't. [snip] > If a school accepts public funds, then they must accept all the public > school issues in order to level the playing field. Then the best school > system given the same resources will rise to the top. Under a voucher system without the restrictions, great schools will naturally attract more vouchers, and will rise to the top. Mediocre schools will quickly sink. [snip] > The upshot is that you'll create a further class division between the > haves (who can afford the private school tuition) and the have nots (who > can't). > But now you're funding this division with public funds. And that's the > atrocity of vouchers. There seems to be a misunderstanding. I don't think you understand what I am proposing. :) I am proposing that ALL schools, irregardless of whether they're public or private, should switch to the voucher system. If you think I'm advocating privatizing the public school system, you won't be too wrong. ;) Just like in any other normal industry, there will be a continuum: from "Cadillac" schools to "Volkswagen" schools. My theory postulates that the "Volkswagen" schools will make far better use of the money than the public schools. > [...] Schools will cherry pick who they want then dump the > rest back into the public schools. I have a hard time believing that any private enterprise would turn away a $9000/year customer. How many businesses do you know of that are picky about their customers? I can only think of a couple off the top of my head (e.g., some insurance companies, maybe some clubs). If an insurance company turns me down, I know there are plenty of others who are eager to take my money. >> 3. Expulsion on academic basis actually sounds like a great idea, as it >> provides an additional incentive for the students to perform. Schools >> would >> exercise this option as a last resort anyway, because expelling a student >> means losing their voucher money. > > I'm trying real hard to keep from chuckling. Getting rid of bad students > improves your test scores. Improved test scores increases enrollments. > Increased enrollments means more vouchers. > > Schools will ditch poor students so fast it'll make your head spin. Nine. Thousand. Dollars. :) That is a lot of reasons for the school to make sure it has done everything in its power to retain the student. And if he is expelled, there are plenty of other schools competing for the vouchers. Even today there exist companies that specialize in helping kids do better in school. Under the voucher system, there would be plenty more such companies to make sure that no child is ever left behind. > And if you think that fear of expulsion will get students to perform then > you really don't understand the problems that public school systems have. What I said was, "it provides an additional incentive". >> 4. I don't see why publishing test data would be a problem for private >> schools, since they outpeform public schools. > > Not if you level the playing field. You'll watch those scores drop like > dead ducks. Since none of us has the hard data, we'll have to agree to disagree on this one. > Private schools are only better because they have better students and > better parents. You remove that and you'll find that they are absolutely > no > better than public schools. Oh yeah? - Why does it take twice as much money to educate a "dumb" public school pupil, than a brilliant private school one? - Do private schools employ incompetent, lazy, or indifferent teachers? - How long do you think it would take a private school to fire a pedophile? >> The vast majority of parents want the best for their children. >> Unfortunately, under the current system, they don't have a choice. > > Your perception isn't grounded in reality. You can look at the test scores > and dropout rates to see that's the case. Low test scores and high dropout rates indicate a problem with the system, they don't mean that parents don't want the best for their children. I remember a story told on PBS by a now famous black physicist (name, anyone?). His mother, after learning that him and his brother were doing poorly in school, removed the TV from their bedroom, and made them write book reports. It was only years later that they discovered that she could barely read the reports. > Here in the Atlanta area we have pockets where the average generation gap > is 13 years apart. You have 26 year old grandparents and 40 year old great > grandparents. None finish school. Many don't work or have marketable > skills. Most are simply trying to survive. [snip] And that proves that parents don't want the best for their children? > The point is that while vouchers as you propose them can certainly help > highly educated, highly motivated families, it will do little for poor, > uneducated folks that the public school systems struggle to educate. The vouchers will give the poor, uneducated folks a choice, an opportunity to provide a better future for their kids. What you described above is a pattern of children from broken families attending broken schools and creating more broken families. I was forced to transfer to an inferior school just because our family moved to a different neighborhood, despite my protests. The kids you talk about are forced by the public school system to attend the schools in the same ghettos where they live, depriving them of the opportunity to break the vicious cycle. [snip] > You've left out the indifference and incompetence of school and system > administrators too. They often will not pull disruptive kids out of the > classroom environment. Kids who make things intolerable for everyone else. > > But what do you do with all of these elements? What do you do with an 8 > year old who can't read, add or subtract and is in the 1st grade for the > 3rd time? What do you do with constantly unruly or disruptive kids. > Private > schools have it easy. Put them out. Simple. But where they go then? Right > to the public school, who can't put them out. Or more accurately when they > finally do put them out of one system, the parents simply move (or borrow > an address) to another district and the cycle starts all over again. You're the expert, but I'll give it a shot. :) Both types of children (distruptive, learning disability) would benefit from a more flexible system that the vouchers will create. Instead of ignoring the problem, the disriptive kid can be counseled by a psychiatrist, given proper diagnosis/medication. The child with the learning disability can benefit from one-on-one tutoring, or maybe just a different teacher who can "get through" to him. ==>Once my girl brought home a frownie because she couldn't grasp the concepts of "more" or "less". She was so happy when she finally "got it" -- I used different words (bigger/smaller) to explain, something her teacher wasn't able to. Finally, it is OK for some students to drop out of the system. I mean, it would be cruel to keep a retarded boy in the same classroom with normal kids. The vouchers can still be used to satisfy his special ed needs. > Trust me teachers do not come into the system indifferent or incompetent. > It is beat into them on a daily basis. I hear you. :( > Of course. Part of that problem is that the pay isn't sufficient to > attract > highly competent and motivated teachers. Byron, do you know this for sure, or are you repeating the myth that the teacher's union is continuing to perpetuate? I personally know a teacher who told me he is making $50k a year, plus full benefits. And let me remind you that teachers work only nine months out of the year. > But the point is that the system is flawed in a multifaceted way. But > withdrawing the best students and their funds isn't the way to fix it. I don't see the voucher system in the same light. I see them as giving every student a choice, and rewarding the schools that make the best use of tax dollars. I'm not sure whether you noticed, but we agree on more things than we disagree. It only looks the other way because I snipped all the parts we agree on. :) I honestly appreciate your feedback, it definitely helps to see the picture from a different POV. Vitaliy -- http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist