MaggieD
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2010
- Messages
- 43,244
- Reaction score
- 44,664
- Location
- Chicago Area
- Gender
- Female
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
Public schools aren't a monopoly...because private schools exist.
Right, I misspoke re monopoly. There would be many more -- and more affordable -- if vouchers were available. And in schools in those poor neighborhoods you reference? Maybe private schools would step away from a one-size-fits-all mentality and turn out kids who could actually read, write and speak proper English. AND be trained to do something after high school other than run drugs.
If I had never seen a regular public school that educated its students well, I would agree with you. But I have, so I can't see the reason in abandoning a system that works in some districts. Also, I have seen private schools and charter schools fail - so it seems to me that the type of school isn't the real problem.
Private schools AND public schools have turned out educated kids from poor neighborhoods. Examples of both exist, which is why there is no reason to scrap public education.
Your wrong, the private/charter schools will become the public schools. The money would be the same except people will have a more successful system and have the choice of school they would like to attend.I oppose voucher programs for the reasons already mentioned in this thread. Public money should be kept for public schools, and not used for private schools.
Just because it works in some places doesn't make successful. And off course private and charter schools fail... it's a business and businesses fail, but a private a charter school has 10X more motivation to do well and stay in business, because they are reliant on the customer bass.
The problem is that competition only works when parents know that they can compete and when parents have the desire to compete. A huge problem in low-income schools (where the worst schools usually are) is that parents aren't going put forth the effort to compete and their children will still be stuck with the crappy schools.The only reason charter/private schools fail today is because the public school system still exists. And it's okay for a private/charter school to fail, it's actually a good thing, because you have weeded out the bad school/business that has the bad policies, and the better schools will survive. Since people will have a choice you can transfer to a school you think is better if a private or charter school is crap.
Your wrong, the private/charter schools will become the public schools. The money would be the same except people will have a more successful system and have the choice of school they would like to attend.
And vouchers piss off that customer base. People who pay a lot of money to send their kids to private schools where other kids can pay less with vouchers will move their kids to private schools that don't accept vouchers, esp. if the new kids bring in new problems. Then the problem will start all over again.
It's just like when states move people from housing projects into the suburbs...the suburbanites move to different suburbs or back to the city and the old suburbs decrease in quality.
Therefore, the better solution is to focus on improving ALL schools that way nobody will even want a voucher.
The problem is that competition only works when parents know that they can compete and when parents have the desire to compete. A huge problem in low-income schools (where the worst schools usually are) is that parents aren't going put forth the effort to compete and their children will still be stuck with the crappy schools.
My main point is this: We need to improve all schools so that no student would even have reason to use a voucher.
This logic is only correct if the private/charter schools have the same requirements in terms of admission.
Ah, but give me a reason to keep them.
No, there would be a separate market between schools who accept any voucher and school who accept the voucher +more money. There will STILL be a school who will want to be better then that other school to get more students= more voucher's= more money.
Your wrong, the private/charter schools will become the public schools. The money would be the same except people will have a more successful system and have the choice of school they would like to attend.
There will always be richer people who can send their kids to richer schools. (there will still be a market for schools that accept voucher's)
The poorer kids STILL can go to the school of their choice, there will STILL be the motivation to be the best school. The new public schools will be in competition to be the best. When there is a crappy school... why would you send your kid there?
You misunderstood my comment... They will become the "public schools", there role as the main educational tool, meaning replacing themNo, actually they would not become public schools, unless you think that they will suddenly be under public control, which would not be the case.
The problem is private schools run on two things: 1.Money 2.Demand for Quality.
When both things are in play, competition will work and everything that you say will happen. School quality will increase.
However, because so many poor parents aren't going to demand quality, the not-so-nice private schools will go for the money without the quality and we'll be stuck where we are now - poor kids with crappy parents get crappy education. Education will become a for-profit industry where people who have no actual interest in educating will get involved and be able to take advantage of students whose parents aren't active enough to demand quality.
The problem of education is that wealthy/middle class parents are more likely to demand a good education for their students, while low-income parents are not. Unless they (including people like me and my parents) demand the same quality for low-income schools, the problem will persist whether it's in a wholly public or private system. I'm arguing that we should just end this problem now by making government take care of all students and schools equally.
You misunderstood my comment... They will become the "public schools", there role as the main educational tool, meaning replacing them
I think you're missing the argument. The argument is that private/charter schools do not HAVE to take a student yet we have mandatory education laws. This means that we would be creating a class of student unwanted by the higher achieving schools because they take more time and effort. This means that the higher levels of achievement is an illusion as the lower achieving students are not factored in.
If they want to be "public schools", they need to be under public control. If they are not, they are private schools and not a place for our education dollars.
Complete privatization of schools is just as bad as having all public schools. There needs to be a balance so that students don't just become corporate or government tools. Part of me wants the Republican dream of all privatization to work so that you guys can see how horrible it is, but then I remember I care more about education than B.S..
That isn't even an argument. That is a simple fix, to make school not be able to decline you on the basis of race, gender, wealth, residence... but only on performance/ and extra money requirements(if it is a school that requires it). Again there will be seperate markets for schools that accept voucher's and schools that require more( just like high performance and private schools are today in comparison to public.) The new "public school" will be the vouchered charter school.
But under the current laws you cannot require charter schools to take all applicants. So you still run into the problem of not having schools for students who need to meet the mandatory education requirement. Plus, discriminating on academic performance creates false statistics.
All of those are easily fixed with laws enforcing non-discrimination.
"So you still run into the problem of not having schools for students who need to meet the mandatory education requirement."
Your reasoning? The majority of people will only rely on the voucher money. Basically all the the people in public schools today will be in the schools that accept voucher's. There will be a huge market for it.
I don't support vouchers at all.
Voucher programs only divert much needed funds away from public schools - putting the burden on those of us who do what we can to make public school work.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?