Holders war on private school vouchers...

Dungheap said:
You could do what Vermont did with Act 60. Only downside is that it would never happen anywhere but Vermont.
Click to expand...
Ohio's supreme court rules our public system of funding public education based on local property taxes unconstitutional about a dozen or so years ago. We still haven't been able to come up with a better system for funding public schools.
 
cawacko said:
No, that's exactly what you are calling for. And I grew up in a family that valued education which is why I am passionate about those who are stuck in failing schools with no options. Come spend 30 years in Oakland, CA and see the public schools I've seen and the results they have produced and then tell me I don't care about education and want schools to fail and don't care about kids. They are failing quite well on their own. So I feel quite alright with myself knowing my beliefs help support making positive changes in the education community.
Click to expand...

So Oakland is a good example where the community CAN'T support the schools like places like Layfayette and Orinda and Marin. While schools get the same funding per pupil - schools in rich suburbs get a lot of money from rich parents; Oakland doesn't have that. Schools in rich suburbs can get bonds passed to get more funding -their residents will pay more in taxes. Schools in poor areas can't do that (or in areas with lots of retirees who don't want to pay more in taxes for schools they won't be using for their children)

It IS about funding. If kids in Oakland get vouchers and go to private schools (assuming they can find any that are affordable and have room for them - see Crash's excellent point, number 36 - http://www.justplainpolitics.com/showthread.php?54683-Holders-war-on-private-school-vouchers...&p=1302703#post1302703 )they take money away from their school, and give them that much less to work with.

Communities like Oakland that serve poor communities need more resources because the kids come from disadvantaged backgrounds - they need to get healthy food, they need to get support for their families as well as them, they need safe places to play - all of this COULD be done through the public school if we were willing to invest in more teachers for smaller class sizes, in social workers, in playgrounds and green spaces, in before and after programs, in intensive one on one tutoring. Handing them a voucher to go to a private school isn't the answer; the private schools can't provide all that either.

Can online schools play a part for some kids? absolutely. Can home schooling? absolutely. Can taking classes at the local community college be part of it? absolutely. But wholesale handing out of vouchers; moving all kids to online schooling so we don't have to have buildings; having all kids home schooled when many of them have parents working multiple jobs; none of this is the answer in bulk.

In bulk, we need to improve our public schools so all kids get a decent education. A kid should come out of grade school in Oakland with the same knowledge a kid in a school in Lafayette has. But to do that - we have to get more money funding the right kinds of programs in Oakland. I'll agree right now there has been corruption and mismanagement in Oakland schools; I'm not saying major changes don't have to be made; but it should be done through the public school system, not giving up and saying let's let private schools do it.
 
tekkychick said:
So Oakland is a good example where the community CAN'T support the schools like places like Layfayette and Orinda and Marin. While schools get the same funding per pupil - schools in rich suburbs get a lot of money from rich parents; Oakland doesn't have that. Schools in rich suburbs can get bonds passed to get more funding -their residents will pay more in taxes. Schools in poor areas can't do that (or in areas with lots of retirees who don't want to pay more in taxes for schools they won't be using for their children)

It IS about funding. If kids in Oakland get vouchers and go to private schools (assuming they can find any that are affordable and have room for them - see Crash's excellent point, number 36 - http://www.justplainpolitics.com/showthread.php?54683-Holders-war-on-private-school-vouchers...&p=1302703#post1302703 )they take money away from their school, and give them that much less to work with.

Communities like Oakland that serve poor communities need more resources because the kids come from disadvantaged backgrounds - they need to get healthy food, they need to get support for their families as well as them, they need safe places to play - all of this COULD be done through the public school if we were willing to invest in more teachers for smaller class sizes, in social workers, in playgrounds and green spaces, in before and after programs, in intensive one on one tutoring. Handing them a voucher to go to a private school isn't the answer; the private schools can't provide all that either.

Can online schools play a part for some kids? absolutely. Can home schooling? absolutely. Can taking classes at the local community college be part of it? absolutely. But wholesale handing out of vouchers; moving all kids to online schooling so we don't have to have buildings; having all kids home schooled when many of them have parents working multiple jobs; none of this is the answer in bulk.

In bulk, we need to improve our public schools so all kids get a decent education. A kid should come out of grade school in Oakland with the same knowledge a kid in a school in Lafayette has. But to do that - we have to get more money funding the right kinds of programs in Oakland. I'll agree right now there has been corruption and mismanagement in Oakland schools; I'm not saying major changes don't have to be made; but it should be done through the public school system, not giving up and saying let's let private schools do it.
Click to expand...

To my knowledge Oakland doesn't offer vouchers. Oakland doesn't have the money the other nearby cities you listed do. Parts of Oakland have money but not to that extent. Yes there are lots of issues other than just the schools that are problems in Oakland. That's a big part of the challenge. But it's also why I support alternative methods of schooling that are tailored to meet the demands of the needy kids. I'm not talking about eliminating public education nor am I talking a national roll out but I do support it areas that have been failing for decades and need a change.
 
cawacko said:
Spending billions on NCLB and small amounts on vouchers isn't how I would go about destroying public education if that was my goal.
Click to expand...

In the United States where support for public education is super high, its the only place you could start.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top