CDZ Vouchers, how the heck would private schools work?

[frigidweirdo]

I am getting more skeptical on this the more I think about it. Then again it is just me and the internet here so set me straight.

How would a dream voucher system work?

Lets say I am in year 5 of the voucher system and we have eliminated public schools. Between my home and work there are 10 grade schools in the area.

- They range in cost from $4500 a year to $13,500.

So the cheapest school is going to fill up with kids from family's which can't afford better. They'll get the cruddiest education and be surrounded by kids from similar families.

The most cost effective couple schools are going to fill up.

One is going to go out of business at an inopportune time (it happens, look at the for profit colleges we have and the closing private schools). Maybe the state will bail it out as its too important to fail mid year. That will be great.

The unstable or non-cost effective schools are going to get the stragglers.

The rich kids are going to largely be at the most expensive ones which if tradition holds will be pretty good schools. Maybe those will offer a scholarship, especially if the state gives them tax breaks for doing so and our kids can get in. (EDIT: with the rich getting a tax credit or whatever there won't be that little bit of incentive for them to actually use the money the state taxes them for education and not pick a private school)

How are we gonna run sign ups? The state forces the last Monday in July is sign up day every year? You just pay ahead of time like for funerals in the hopes of saving a spot for your 1 year old?

What if the cheap schools fill up and that is all I can afford?

Will we have a way of forcing any of these schools to take special needs kids who can't cost effectively be taught?

No one is going to want to send their kids to where "they" (blacks, latinos, native americans, whoever you pick on locally) largely go.

I presume my old neighbor still have to pay taxes to be given to me to help me pick an expensive school?

Are we gonna Standardize test these kids to let them go onto the next grade? Otherwise some entrepreneur is going to give all his Senior's A's to get them college scholarships and the school a better reputation in the community. (something similar happened at a local nursing school where apparently they graduated everyone and hoped the state tests caught the undeserving)

What else am I not thinking about? There are positives, right?

A dream voucher system would work without vouchers. Vouchers are the biggest waste of time and money that anyone has ever seen. In the UK the system works whereby any parent can choose whichever public school they want. It doesn't matter where the school is, they're entitled to go to that school. Doesn't mean the school will let them in. The school then received money from the government for each student it has. Simples. No vouchers, just plain and simple way of dealing with education.

 

[Picaro]

Public schools are all technically 'private' schools now; there is no Federal school district system, they're all independent districts. The issue is how much control these schools want to give away to the ridiculous strings put on Federal funds, is all. And yes, vouchers will indeed be subsidies for every student attending a school taking vouchers, as the money will go toward financing the school and thus every student going there, so it doesn't matter if there are 'limits' or not, and in fact the vouchers would never be enough to pay for a genuine 'private school experience' for very very poor or working class students; no poor or working class family is going to have the resources or time to get their kid(s) from South Dallas to classes in Plano every morning or where ever, they're still going to be choosing from schools that are nearby and already pretty much the same socioeconomic region they're in now.

And you don't get it......they won't have to leave South Dallas....with voucher, people will come in and open new schools......and they will do it to get the voucher money......

I get it perfectly; these 'charter schools' and the like will be exactly the same as public schools are now, they will 'compete' for money based on attendance and seat warming for their 'profits', and will be no different at all, and many will fail, leaving their former 'students' in exactly where they were before. Far better results will be obtained by merely changing the teaching methods back to what worked well before, and stop pandering and catering to idiots and whiners with stupid kids and stupid parents, imposing real discipline on students and failing those who fail, regardless of whether or not it affects some minority disproportionately or not. It isn't rocket science, and basing everything in society on some silly 'free markets are efficient' fantasy is no panancea for genuine education; just because some company makes a profit off of vouchers isn't going to make them refuse money from idiots or does it mean they're actually educating anybody, just the opposite in fact; they want more bodies in the seats to make bigger profits, period.

If 'free markets' really existed and worked, everybody would be broke in real life, and I would still have to have a real job just to exist. The fact is 'free markets' have never existed, and they would never be 'efficient' if they somehow did exist, however briefly.

 

[Picaro]

I am getting more skeptical on this the more I think about it. Then again it is just me and the internet here so set me straight.

How would a dream voucher system work?

Lets say I am in year 5 of the voucher system and we have eliminated public schools. Between my home and work there are 10 grade schools in the area.

- They range in cost from $4500 a year to $13,500.

So the cheapest school is going to fill up with kids from family's which can't afford better. They'll get the cruddiest education and be surrounded by kids from similar families.

The most cost effective couple schools are going to fill up.

One is going to go out of business at an inopportune time (it happens, look at the for profit colleges we have and the closing private schools). Maybe the state will bail it out as its too important to fail mid year. That will be great.

The unstable or non-cost effective schools are going to get the stragglers.

The rich kids are going to largely be at the most expensive ones which if tradition holds will be pretty good schools. Maybe those will offer a scholarship, especially if the state gives them tax breaks for doing so and our kids can get in. (EDIT: with the rich getting a tax credit or whatever there won't be that little bit of incentive for them to actually use the money the state taxes them for education and not pick a private school)

How are we gonna run sign ups? The state forces the last Monday in July is sign up day every year? You just pay ahead of time like for funerals in the hopes of saving a spot for your 1 year old?

What if the cheap schools fill up and that is all I can afford?

Will we have a way of forcing any of these schools to take special needs kids who can't cost effectively be taught?

No one is going to want to send their kids to where "they" (blacks, latinos, native americans, whoever you pick on locally) largely go.

I presume my old neighbor still have to pay taxes to be given to me to help me pick an expensive school?

Are we gonna Standardize test these kids to let them go onto the next grade? Otherwise some entrepreneur is going to give all his Senior's A's to get them college scholarships and the school a better reputation in the community. (something similar happened at a local nursing school where apparently they graduated everyone and hoped the state tests caught the undeserving)

What else am I not thinking about? There are positives, right?

A dream voucher system would work without vouchers. Vouchers are the biggest waste of time and money that anyone has ever seen. In the UK the system works whereby any parent can choose whichever public school they want. It doesn't matter where the school is, they're entitled to go to that school. Doesn't mean the school will let them in. The school then received money from the government for each student it has. Simples. No vouchers, just plain and simple way of dealing with education.

The UK system won't work here; all school districts in the U.S are independent and are locally run by municipalities and counties. The current failures are easily fixed with the schools we already have without anything drastic or experimental; it's called Adults growing some balls and slapping down bureaucracies and asshole lawyers and snotty brats and re-introducing merit based achievement.

 

[Bruce_T_Laney]

I am getting more skeptical on this the more I think about it. Then again it is just me and the internet here so set me straight.

How would a dream voucher system work?

Lets say I am in year 5 of the voucher system and we have eliminated public schools. Between my home and work there are 10 grade schools in the area.

- They range in cost from $4500 a year to $13,500.

So the cheapest school is going to fill up with kids from family's which can't afford better. They'll get the cruddiest education and be surrounded by kids from similar families.

The most cost effective couple schools are going to fill up.

One is going to go out of business at an inopportune time (it happens, look at the for profit colleges we have and the closing private schools). Maybe the state will bail it out as its too important to fail mid year. That will be great.

The unstable or non-cost effective schools are going to get the stragglers.

The rich kids are going to largely be at the most expensive ones which if tradition holds will be pretty good schools. Maybe those will offer a scholarship, especially if the state gives them tax breaks for doing so and our kids can get in. (EDIT: with the rich getting a tax credit or whatever there won't be that little bit of incentive for them to actually use the money the state taxes them for education and not pick a private school)

How are we gonna run sign ups? The state forces the last Monday in July is sign up day every year? You just pay ahead of time like for funerals in the hopes of saving a spot for your 1 year old?

What if the cheap schools fill up and that is all I can afford?

Will we have a way of forcing any of these schools to take special needs kids who can't cost effectively be taught?

No one is going to want to send their kids to where "they" (blacks, latinos, native americans, whoever you pick on locally) largely go.

I presume my old neighbor still have to pay taxes to be given to me to help me pick an expensive school?

Are we gonna Standardize test these kids to let them go onto the next grade? Otherwise some entrepreneur is going to give all his Senior's A's to get them college scholarships and the school a better reputation in the community. (something similar happened at a local nursing school where apparently they graduated everyone and hoped the state tests caught the undeserving)

What else am I not thinking about? There are positives, right?

Voucher allow you to make the choice which school you want your kid to attend.

If you want to send your child to a cheap school while not kicking in a few bucks to send them to a better school then that is your problem and not mine.

You had the child and it is your job to raise them and not my job nor the government job to educate your child.

So if you send your child to a cheap school then expect substandard results and if you want more for your child then pony up for the better school and yes you should sacrifice for your child future if you are a good parent!

Ah, punish the kids to an inferior eduction for the inability of the parents to pay. Got it.

Don't have kids if you can not pay for their education and need help from the government to raise them.

Funny how you want to use the kid to spread your wish to have public education that clearly fail the child because parents like you refuse to invest in your child education.

You're doing the child an injustice when you limit their choice only to public education.

Also parents like you could request members in your church and community to help sponsor your child education through scholarships or donations...

I know how dare I expect you to pay for your child education when you can just demand the taxpayer to pay for it and then shove them in public education while you waste your money on stuff you want..


If you have the child then pay for the better education and if not then live with the reality you suck as a parent and failed your child!

 

[martybegan]

The best and cheapest form of education is to eliminate Charter Schools, and set up a standardized cirriculum for the nation.

The idea that States should control education comes from the conditions which existed in Colonial times and are no longer exist today.

In the days of the Founders, people were born, grew up, lived and died all in one locale. They didn't move from one state to another. Today, this is a rarity. People move from the country to the city, from state to state, and basically, follow the jobs.

In the days of the Founders, what skills you needed to learn, depended on where you lived. If you lived in an agricultural state, then you needed to know about life in your state, its geography, conditions, and the skills required by the community. If you lived in the forests of New England, you needed other information for your survival, and other skills for your trades.

Today, staying in one town or even in one state all of your life, is less common. Everybody is from somewhere else. The skills required to succeed these days are also more homogenized. Everyone needs English, math, science and computer skills. I would say that a basic course in civics is also required.

Since you have 5 million jobs and even more people out of work, I would say that the biggest problem you have is your schools are not teaching the skills the economy requires.

But you people can't even agree on a common core - a skill set that every state's education department can agree is required. It used to be "reading, writing and arithmetic".

And stop blaming teachers for how the kids are turning out. If the states weren't so concerned about "liberal bias", and were more concerned about teaching kids science and technology, you wouldn't have 5 million jobs which cannot be filled.

You're teaching to the "cowboy economy". Time to teach to the skills for the 21st Century.

So basically teach everyone like they are living in the big city? No, hell no. More overreach by the federal government, proposed by people who love them some un-elected bureaucrats 1000 miles away lording over them.

 

[Picaro]

In the days of the Founders, what skills you needed to learn, depended on where you lived. If you lived in an agricultural state, then you needed to know about life in your state, its geography, conditions, and the skills required by the community. If you lived in the forests of New England, you needed other information for your survival, and other skills for your trades.

And they also taught subjects like History, Literature, Poetry, Theology, and some music, as creating a common national culture is also just as important.

Today, staying in one town or even in one state all of your life, is less common. Everybody is from somewhere else. The skills required to succeed these days are also more homogenized. Everyone needs English, math, science and computer skills. I would say that a basic course in civics is also required.

Agreed. And 'social promotion' isn't doing much at all to encourage any of that.

Since you have 5 million jobs and even more people out of work, I would say that the biggest problem you have is your schools are not teaching the skills the economy requires.

And it never will, since most jobs are being dumbed down and don't require much in the way of education, and in any case most employers lie constantly about 'skill shortages' that don't exist, and education systems are wasting huge sums pandering to the lies to boot. Handing out green cards reduces the value of specialized skill sets tremendously, and this becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy down the road just a short way. Texas Instruments is constantly whining about their 'shortages', but the reality is they've created their own problems by the way they handle lay offs and their labor practices; a lot fewer people ever go back to work for them. That isn't a 'labor shortage', that's called shooting themselves in the foot, and it's repeated throughout the tech industry daily. And, there aren't nearly enough 'tech' jobs to go around anyway, so training tech companies' workers for them at public expense is a waste of time and money.

But you people can't even agree on a common core - a skill set that every state's education department can agree is required. It used to be "reading, writing and arithmetic".

True, but there is more to education than those.

And stop blaming teachers for how the kids are turning out.

Agree again.

If the states weren't so concerned about "liberal bias", and were more concerned about teaching kids science and technology, you wouldn't have 5 million jobs which cannot be filled.

They can be filled; it's just a myth that they can't be. You can't hold wages down to less than 30% of what they were just a few decades ago and then expect people to drop everything and pay to train themselves for your temp jobs, then train for the next 'hot job' 3 years later when you're laid off, and then another 'hot job' skill set three years after that, and so on and so on. Isn't going to happen, this permanent parade of yuppie gypsy caravans moving around from one tech ghetto to another. If you can't find 5,000 electronics techs who want to move to Arizona or the Bay area for $9 an hour, well tough; that isn't a 'shortage' of anything except brains in the company management.

You're teaching to the "cowboy economy". Time to teach to the skills for the 21st Century.

lol, which is of course learning the phrase' Do You Want Fries With That?', not anything remotely requiring any education past third grade, if that; that's the general trend in 'new job creation', not physics and neurosurgery or programming. If you doubt this just look at where the vast majority of those new jobs created in the last 30 years are, and it isn't 'high tech' or sciences.

 

[2aguy]

Public schools are all technically 'private' schools now; there is no Federal school district system, they're all independent districts. The issue is how much control these schools want to give away to the ridiculous strings put on Federal funds, is all. And yes, vouchers will indeed be subsidies for every student attending a school taking vouchers, as the money will go toward financing the school and thus every student going there, so it doesn't matter if there are 'limits' or not, and in fact the vouchers would never be enough to pay for a genuine 'private school experience' for very very poor or working class students; no poor or working class family is going to have the resources or time to get their kid(s) from South Dallas to classes in Plano every morning or where ever, they're still going to be choosing from schools that are nearby and already pretty much the same socioeconomic region they're in now.

And you don't get it......they won't have to leave South Dallas....with voucher, people will come in and open new schools......and they will do it to get the voucher money......

I get it perfectly; these 'charter schools' and the like will be exactly the same as public schools are now, they will 'compete' for money based on attendance and seat warming for their 'profits', and will be no different at all, and many will fail, leaving their former 'students' in exactly where they were before. Far better results will be obtained by merely changing the teaching methods back to what worked well before, and stop pandering and catering to idiots and whiners with stupid kids and stupid parents, imposing real discipline on students and failing those who fail, regardless of whether or not it affects some minority disproportionately or not. It isn't rocket science, and basing everything in society on some silly 'free markets are efficient' fantasy is no panancea for genuine education; just because some company makes a profit off of vouchers isn't going to make them refuse money from idiots or does it mean they're actually educating anybody, just the opposite in fact; they want more bodies in the seats to make bigger profits, period.

If 'free markets' really existed and worked, everybody would be broke in real life, and I would still have to have a real job just to exist. The fact is 'free markets' have never existed, and they would never be 'efficient' if they somehow did exist, however briefly.

Wrong.....not even close to accurate, do you know why? Right now.....to repeat myself........if your school is a nightmare...you have no options if you are not wealthy enough to pay taxes for the horrible school, and then pay for your own child's education at a private or religious school......the difference with vouchers....if you have a horrible school in your district...you now have the money, no matter how poor you are, to pull you kid and send them to another school, and the arbitrary border enforced by the school districts and teachers unions can't keep you there.....

Also, if your school sucks, then other people can come in and open a new school in the same neighborhood that will actually educate your children. Why would someone do that...because they can earn your voucher money...you are now a paying customer who has to be happy with the product they produce...that is an educated child......and if they want you to stay in that school, they need to actually perform...so they will hire good teachers, enforce actual discipline and....this may seem strange to those who support public education.....they will actually provide an education for the children who attend......

This isn't rocket science...as you say........every day you people travel around experiencingt the magic of vouchers for everything....cell phones, cars, t.v.s which have gotten better, and less expensive through the magic of having to make the customer happy...

For some reason.......you guys do not think this same dynamic.....making the customer happy and being accountable to the customer....will make education better......

What is the magic of public edcuation over parents having the power to choose where their kids to to school? Why is this so hard to understand?

 

[Toronado3800]

Most of the pro voucher replies here have driven me FURTHER away from supporting vouchers.

Judging by the replies in general it seems vouchers are a way to help folks build up their family dynasties while leaving kids from families too poor to pay for the top schools stuck in the failed now less funded public schools or the cheapest of private schools.

There have been few replies about how private schools do better with lower funding, presumably because it is a dead end argument since private schools kick high need/low reward kids back to the state.

There have been hints at local control over ciriculums but to that I would say sometimes it is best to have a standard ciriculum (like spelling lol) forced on you. Or at least not that of whatever corporation or religion (Scientology!) runs your school.

Anyone mention how private school unions are weaker than public? I do support firing bad teachers so that is a point.

 

[Correll]

I am getting more skeptical on this the more I think about it. Then again it is just me and the internet here so set me straight.

How would a dream voucher system work?

Lets say I am in year 5 of the voucher system and we have eliminated public schools.

We will not eliminate public schools. Indeed, as they have infrastructure in place and already have the students, not to mention some "brand loyalty" from local parents, they will have tremendous advantages in competition.

Between my home and work there are 10 grade schools in the area.

- They range in cost from $4500 a year to $13,500.

So the cheapest school is going to fill up with kids from family's which can't afford better. They'll get the cruddiest education and be surrounded by kids from similar families.

It has been demonstrated that more money is not the answer for education. What truly drives education outcome is parental involvement.

Your assumption that cheaper will mean worse is not true. A cheaper no frills school in a middle class neighborhood with good management, could turn out a very good outcome.

The most cost effective couple schools are going to fill up.

By cost effective, you mean Good right? So that's a lot of students getting decent educations. YEAH!

One is going to go out of business at an inopportune time (it happens, look at the for profit colleges we have and the closing private schools). Maybe the state will bail it out as its too important to fail mid year. That will be great.

I have a school close on me halfway though a year. It was found to be not up to code on something. We were shoved into a school one district over. I don't recall it being a big thing. Annoying in most ways. FUn to meet new kids.

The unstable or non-cost effective schools are going to get the stragglers.

Bad schools, yes, there will be some. Much like there are today.

The rich kids are going to largely be at the most expensive ones which if tradition holds will be pretty good schools. Maybe those will offer a scholarship, especially if the state gives them tax breaks for doing so and our kids can get in. (EDIT: with the rich getting a tax credit or whatever there won't be that little bit of incentive for them to actually use the money the state taxes them for education and not pick a private school)

Good point about the scholarships. Annoying to deal with at such an early age, but if it means more kids getting a quality education, that's fine.

How are we gonna run sign ups? The state forces the last Monday in July is sign up day every year? You just pay ahead of time like for funerals in the hopes of saving a spot for your 1 year old?

NOt sure.

What if the cheap schools fill up and that is all I can afford?

IF the local public school closed, it must have been a hellhole.

Will we have a way of forcing any of these schools to take special needs kids who can't cost effectively be taught?

They could get larger vouchers. It is not like we are NOT already paying out the ass for them.

No one is going to want to send their kids to where "they" (blacks, latinos, native americans, whoever you pick on locally) largely go.

Stop living in the past. THe problem is not that we pick on them. And hasn't been for a long, long time.

I presume my old neighbor still have to pay taxes to be given to me to help me pick an expensive school?

Yep.

Are we gonna Standardize test these kids to let them go onto the next grade?

Yes.




Other things to consider.

1. Online schools. IMO, this is going to be the tech fix for our political problem of education. Especially as software first, greatly aids teachers and then replaces them.

2. At home schooling. If vouchers can be spent on at home schooling products and support, the industry to help at home schoolers will greatly enlarge and greatly improve.

And the more children a family has the more attractive the option of saving on day care costs by having a stay at home parent.


If there are nearby family or friends who can work together the synergy can build up nicely.

 

[2aguy]

Most of the pro voucher replies here have driven me FURTHER away from supporting vouchers.

Judging by the replies in general it seems vouchers are a way to help folks build up their family dynasties while leaving kids from families too poor to pay for the top schools stuck in the failed now less funded public schools or the cheapest of private schools.

There have been few replies about how private schools do better with lower funding, presumably because it is a dead end argument since private schools kick high need/low reward kids back to the state.

There have been hints at local control over ciriculums but to that I would say sometimes it is best to have a standard ciriculum (like spelling lol) forced on you. Or at least not that of whatever corporation or religion (Scientology!) runs your school.

Anyone mention how private school unions are weaker than public? I do support firing bad teachers so that is a point.

And how is that possible that you get that from the voucher discussion? Who said private schools would have lower funding...do you not understand that the new schools would get the voucher of the family...that means they would get the whole cost of the education of their child...complete control over those funds....? And the high risk low reward kids...? How are they currently fairing in the public schools controlled by the education wing of the democrat party.....?

Vouchers would open up opportunities for high risk kids to actually get into schools targeted to their needs, instead of being warehoused in public schools who simply need their attendance.....it would also mean that parents with high risk kids would finally have the ability to get their kids the help they need...if that help is not being given by their local school...

Why is this concept so hard to understand? Freedom and power for the parents as consumers will improve the education for their children and the other children...forcing them to stay in the public schools simply because they live in one town over another has done nothing to fix the education problem at the K-12 level.........

 

[2aguy]

I am getting more skeptical on this the more I think about it. Then again it is just me and the internet here so set me straight.

How would a dream voucher system work?

Lets say I am in year 5 of the voucher system and we have eliminated public schools.

We will not eliminate public schools. Indeed, as they have infrastructure in place and already have the students, not to mention some "brand loyalty" from local parents, they will have tremendous advantages in competition.

Between my home and work there are 10 grade schools in the area.

- They range in cost from $4500 a year to $13,500.

So the cheapest school is going to fill up with kids from family's which can't afford better. They'll get the cruddiest education and be surrounded by kids from similar families.

It has been demonstrated that more money is not the answer for education. What truly drives education outcome is parental involvement.

Your assumption that cheaper will mean worse is not true. A cheaper no frills school in a middle class neighborhood with good management, could turn out a very good outcome.

The most cost effective couple schools are going to fill up.

By cost effective, you mean Good right? So that's a lot of students getting decent educations. YEAH!

One is going to go out of business at an inopportune time (it happens, look at the for profit colleges we have and the closing private schools). Maybe the state will bail it out as its too important to fail mid year. That will be great.

I have a school close on me halfway though a year. It was found to be not up to code on something. We were shoved into a school one district over. I don't recall it being a big thing. Annoying in most ways. FUn to meet new kids.

The unstable or non-cost effective schools are going to get the stragglers.

Bad schools, yes, there will be some. Much like there are today.

The rich kids are going to largely be at the most expensive ones which if tradition holds will be pretty good schools. Maybe those will offer a scholarship, especially if the state gives them tax breaks for doing so and our kids can get in. (EDIT: with the rich getting a tax credit or whatever there won't be that little bit of incentive for them to actually use the money the state taxes them for education and not pick a private school)

Good point about the scholarships. Annoying to deal with at such an early age, but if it means more kids getting a quality education, that's fine.

How are we gonna run sign ups? The state forces the last Monday in July is sign up day every year? You just pay ahead of time like for funerals in the hopes of saving a spot for your 1 year old?

NOt sure.

What if the cheap schools fill up and that is all I can afford?

IF the local public school closed, it must have been a hellhole.

Will we have a way of forcing any of these schools to take special needs kids who can't cost effectively be taught?

They could get larger vouchers. It is not like we are NOT already paying out the ass for them.

No one is going to want to send their kids to where "they" (blacks, latinos, native americans, whoever you pick on locally) largely go.

Stop living in the past. THe problem is not that we pick on them. And hasn't been for a long, long time.

I presume my old neighbor still have to pay taxes to be given to me to help me pick an expensive school?

Yep.

Are we gonna Standardize test these kids to let them go onto the next grade?

Yes.




Other things to consider.

1. Online schools. IMO, this is going to be the tech fix for our political problem of education. Especially as software first, greatly aids teachers and then replaces them.

2. At home schooling. If vouchers can be spent on at home schooling products and support, the industry to help at home schoolers will greatly enlarge and greatly improve.

And the more children a family has the more attractive the option of saving on day care costs by having a stay at home parent.


If there are nearby family or friends who can work together the synergy can build up nicely.

The most cost effective couple schools are going to fill up.

By cost effective, you mean Good right? So that's a lot of students getting decent educations. YEAH!

And you are right...and the main thing.....because parents will have money, more, good schools will open up.....the current monopoly and limit on schools will no longer exist...so more and better schools will now have an opportunity to be opened.....you could very easily see experienced teachers setting up their own schools to actually teach children.......

 

[Toronado3800]

I am getting more skeptical on this the more I think about it. Then again it is just me and the internet here so set me straight.

How would a dream voucher system work?

Lets say I am in year 5 of the voucher system and we have eliminated public schools.

We will not eliminate public schools. Indeed, as they have infrastructure in place and already have the students, not to mention some "brand loyalty" from local parents, they will have tremendous advantages in competition.

Between my home and work there are 10 grade schools in the area.

- They range in cost from $4500 a year to $13,500.

So the cheapest school is going to fill up with kids from family's which can't afford better. They'll get the cruddiest education and be surrounded by kids from similar families.

It has been demonstrated that more money is not the answer for education. What truly drives education outcome is parental involvement.

Your assumption that cheaper will mean worse is not true. A cheaper no frills school in a middle class neighborhood with good management, could turn out a very good outcome.

The most cost effective couple schools are going to fill up.

By cost effective, you mean Good right? So that's a lot of students getting decent educations. YEAH!

One is going to go out of business at an inopportune time (it happens, look at the for profit colleges we have and the closing private schools). Maybe the state will bail it out as its too important to fail mid year. That will be great.

I have a school close on me halfway though a year. It was found to be not up to code on something. We were shoved into a school one district over. I don't recall it being a big thing. Annoying in most ways. FUn to meet new kids.

The unstable or non-cost effective schools are going to get the stragglers.

Bad schools, yes, there will be some. Much like there are today.

The rich kids are going to largely be at the most expensive ones which if tradition holds will be pretty good schools. Maybe those will offer a scholarship, especially if the state gives them tax breaks for doing so and our kids can get in. (EDIT: with the rich getting a tax credit or whatever there won't be that little bit of incentive for them to actually use the money the state taxes them for education and not pick a private school)

Good point about the scholarships. Annoying to deal with at such an early age, but if it means more kids getting a quality education, that's fine.

How are we gonna run sign ups? The state forces the last Monday in July is sign up day every year? You just pay ahead of time like for funerals in the hopes of saving a spot for your 1 year old?

NOt sure.

What if the cheap schools fill up and that is all I can afford?

IF the local public school closed, it must have been a hellhole.

Will we have a way of forcing any of these schools to take special needs kids who can't cost effectively be taught?

They could get larger vouchers. It is not like we are NOT already paying out the ass for them.

No one is going to want to send their kids to where "they" (blacks, latinos, native americans, whoever you pick on locally) largely go.

Stop living in the past. THe problem is not that we pick on them. And hasn't been for a long, long time.

I presume my old neighbor still have to pay taxes to be given to me to help me pick an expensive school?

Yep.

Are we gonna Standardize test these kids to let them go onto the next grade?

Yes.




Other things to consider.

1. Online schools. IMO, this is going to be the tech fix for our political problem of education. Especially as software first, greatly aids teachers and then replaces them.

2. At home schooling. If vouchers can be spent on at home schooling products and support, the industry to help at home schoolers will greatly enlarge and greatly improve.

And the more children a family has the more attractive the option of saving on day care costs by having a stay at home parent.


If there are nearby family or friends who can work together the synergy can build up nicely.

Thanks for taking the time to write all that out.

"We will not eliminate public schools. Indeed, as they have infrastructure in place and already have the students, not to mention some "brand loyalty" from local parents, they will have tremendous advantages in competition."
"IF the local public school closed, it must have been a hellhole."

I'm a free market guy. If the private schools are better as voucher supporters say, the public schools will be eliminated or become a refuge for the especially poor, especially after their funding is pulled.

"It has been demonstrated that more money is not the answer for education. What truly drives education outcome is parental involvement.

Your assumption that cheaper will mean worse is not true. A cheaper no frills school in a middle class neighborhood with good management, could turn out a very good outcome."

Cheaper means worse in a preponderance of the cases in St Louis area private schools. There are exceptions though. We are not talking about the difference between $15,000 school and a $14,000 school but between a $15,000 and a $4,500 school.

"By cost effective, you mean Good right? So that's a lot of students getting decent educations. YEAH!"
Pretty much, by cost effective I mean.... maybe an analogy...A Lexus is pretty nice but a Bentley is way nicer. The 5% nicer a Bentley is just is not worth the price to anyone but the wealthy.

"Bad schools, yes, there will be some. Much like there are today."
Bad schools here are largely based on income. The differences in middle class areas are more subtle.

"Stop living in the past. THe problem is not that we pick on them. And hasn't been for a long, long time."
In regards to race and voluntary white segregation..... There is enough white flight here it is the driving force in our real-estate values. "Whites" talk to me in bars and in line at the car parts stores like I'm one of them. This IS a thing here and I suspect other places.

"Other things to consider.

1. Online schools. IMO, this is going to be the tech fix for our political problem of education. Especially as software first, greatly aids teachers and then replaces them.

2. At home schooling. If vouchers can be spent on at home schooling products and support, the industry to help at home schoolers will greatly enlarge and greatly improve.

And the more children a family has the more attractive the option of saving on day care costs by having a stay at home parent.


If there are nearby family or friends who can work together the synergy can build up nicely."

As long as the kids from whatever home school have to pass the same state tests I am ok with them as is but it seems like just another name for a voucher system.

Maybe education in the $50,000 a year white population in the St Louis area is just poor and my glass is half empty.

My pessimism may keep me from agreeing. You have well thought out points and present them in a mature way. The boards need more people like you. It is almost a pleasure to disagree, debate or talk.

 

[2aguy]

I am getting more skeptical on this the more I think about it. Then again it is just me and the internet here so set me straight.

How would a dream voucher system work?

Lets say I am in year 5 of the voucher system and we have eliminated public schools.

We will not eliminate public schools. Indeed, as they have infrastructure in place and already have the students, not to mention some "brand loyalty" from local parents, they will have tremendous advantages in competition.

Between my home and work there are 10 grade schools in the area.

- They range in cost from $4500 a year to $13,500.

So the cheapest school is going to fill up with kids from family's which can't afford better. They'll get the cruddiest education and be surrounded by kids from similar families.

It has been demonstrated that more money is not the answer for education. What truly drives education outcome is parental involvement.

Your assumption that cheaper will mean worse is not true. A cheaper no frills school in a middle class neighborhood with good management, could turn out a very good outcome.

The most cost effective couple schools are going to fill up.

By cost effective, you mean Good right? So that's a lot of students getting decent educations. YEAH!

One is going to go out of business at an inopportune time (it happens, look at the for profit colleges we have and the closing private schools). Maybe the state will bail it out as its too important to fail mid year. That will be great.

I have a school close on me halfway though a year. It was found to be not up to code on something. We were shoved into a school one district over. I don't recall it being a big thing. Annoying in most ways. FUn to meet new kids.

The unstable or non-cost effective schools are going to get the stragglers.

Bad schools, yes, there will be some. Much like there are today.

The rich kids are going to largely be at the most expensive ones which if tradition holds will be pretty good schools. Maybe those will offer a scholarship, especially if the state gives them tax breaks for doing so and our kids can get in. (EDIT: with the rich getting a tax credit or whatever there won't be that little bit of incentive for them to actually use the money the state taxes them for education and not pick a private school)

Good point about the scholarships. Annoying to deal with at such an early age, but if it means more kids getting a quality education, that's fine.

How are we gonna run sign ups? The state forces the last Monday in July is sign up day every year? You just pay ahead of time like for funerals in the hopes of saving a spot for your 1 year old?

NOt sure.

What if the cheap schools fill up and that is all I can afford?

IF the local public school closed, it must have been a hellhole.

Will we have a way of forcing any of these schools to take special needs kids who can't cost effectively be taught?

They could get larger vouchers. It is not like we are NOT already paying out the ass for them.

No one is going to want to send their kids to where "they" (blacks, latinos, native americans, whoever you pick on locally) largely go.

Stop living in the past. THe problem is not that we pick on them. And hasn't been for a long, long time.

I presume my old neighbor still have to pay taxes to be given to me to help me pick an expensive school?

Yep.

Are we gonna Standardize test these kids to let them go onto the next grade?

Yes.




Other things to consider.

1. Online schools. IMO, this is going to be the tech fix for our political problem of education. Especially as software first, greatly aids teachers and then replaces them.

2. At home schooling. If vouchers can be spent on at home schooling products and support, the industry to help at home schoolers will greatly enlarge and greatly improve.

And the more children a family has the more attractive the option of saving on day care costs by having a stay at home parent.


If there are nearby family or friends who can work together the synergy can build up nicely.

What you could see? Home schooled kids.......taught by actual teachers over their computers.......thereby bringing professional level teaching to the home school dynamic.....and that is what really terrifies the democrat unions...

 

[Toronado3800]

Most of the pro voucher replies here have driven me FURTHER away from supporting vouchers.

Judging by the replies in general it seems vouchers are a way to help folks build up their family dynasties while leaving kids from families too poor to pay for the top schools stuck in the failed now less funded public schools or the cheapest of private schools.

There have been few replies about how private schools do better with lower funding, presumably because it is a dead end argument since private schools kick high need/low reward kids back to the state.

There have been hints at local control over ciriculums but to that I would say sometimes it is best to have a standard ciriculum (like spelling lol) forced on you. Or at least not that of whatever corporation or religion (Scientology!) runs your school.

Anyone mention how private school unions are weaker than public? I do support firing bad teachers so that is a point.

And how is that possible that you get that from the voucher discussion? Who said private schools would have lower funding...do you not understand that the new schools would get the voucher of the family...that means they would get the whole cost of the education of their child...complete control over those funds....? And the high risk low reward kids...? How are they currently fairing in the public schools controlled by the education wing of the democrat party.....?

Vouchers would open up opportunities for high risk kids to actually get into schools targeted to their needs, instead of being warehoused in public schools who simply need their attendance.....it would also mean that parents with high risk kids would finally have the ability to get their kids the help they need...if that help is not being given by their local school...

Why is this concept so hard to understand? Freedom and power for the parents as consumers will improve the education for their children and the other children...forcing them to stay in the public schools simply because they live in one town over another has done nothing to fix the education problem at the K-12 level.........

I had made points I expected the pro-voucher people to make. Things I had taken into consideration before coming to my conclusion.

As far as "hard to understand", I understand, just disagree. It is possible to understand and disagree.

Heck, to use a poor saying, I will say there are frequently two ways to skin a cat without destroying a country. We just disagree on which way here.

 

[2aguy]

Most of the pro voucher replies here have driven me FURTHER away from supporting vouchers.

Judging by the replies in general it seems vouchers are a way to help folks build up their family dynasties while leaving kids from families too poor to pay for the top schools stuck in the failed now less funded public schools or the cheapest of private schools.

There have been few replies about how private schools do better with lower funding, presumably because it is a dead end argument since private schools kick high need/low reward kids back to the state.

There have been hints at local control over ciriculums but to that I would say sometimes it is best to have a standard ciriculum (like spelling lol) forced on you. Or at least not that of whatever corporation or religion (Scientology!) runs your school.

Anyone mention how private school unions are weaker than public? I do support firing bad teachers so that is a point.

And how is that possible that you get that from the voucher discussion? Who said private schools would have lower funding...do you not understand that the new schools would get the voucher of the family...that means they would get the whole cost of the education of their child...complete control over those funds....? And the high risk low reward kids...? How are they currently fairing in the public schools controlled by the education wing of the democrat party.....?

Vouchers would open up opportunities for high risk kids to actually get into schools targeted to their needs, instead of being warehoused in public schools who simply need their attendance.....it would also mean that parents with high risk kids would finally have the ability to get their kids the help they need...if that help is not being given by their local school...

Why is this concept so hard to understand? Freedom and power for the parents as consumers will improve the education for their children and the other children...forcing them to stay in the public schools simply because they live in one town over another has done nothing to fix the education problem at the K-12 level.........

I had made points I expected the pro-voucher people to make. Things I had taken into consideration before coming to my conclusion.

As far as "hard to understand", I understand, just disagree. It is possible to understand and disagree.

Heck, to use a poor saying, I will say there are frequently two ways to skin a cat without destroying a country. We just disagree on which way here.

The mistake you are making is thinking that the number of schools will remain the same....vouchers change that dynamic. They open up the ability of others to actually open up new schools right in the same neighborhoods as the bad public schools...something that is almost impossible to do right now because not enough people have the extra money to pay taxes for the bad public school, and then put enough extra money together to send their kid to a different school......they can't send them to a better public school right now unless they want to move their entire family to a new school district.....and vouchers even end that problem.....they could send their kid to the better public school one or two towns over...they won't be stopped by the district border, which is what stops most people right now.

Vouchers fix so many problems by giving Parents freedom of choice, freedom of movement and the power to force schools to actually do their jobs....

 

[usmbguest5318]

Where the line of discussion on which you've embarked goes is straight to the competing notions of supply and demand (capitalism) education (SDE) vs. education as a right (EAAR). There are strong positions to take on each side of that debate, but there is no "right" answer.

I think any individual's position on that matter comes down to their principles. I think a lot of people, however, don't have any that are very clearly thought through and integrated across a spectrum of issues. I think what most people have is merely "checklists" of what they think they want (or are told to want) based on which party espouses any given item on the list. I don't think most folks have given a moment's thought to whether their so-called principle that leads them to prefer SDE supports/compliments/endorses their positions on other matters.

I'm not going to below broach the SDE/EAAR discussion. If need be, I can or will in another post/thread.

they can't send them to a better public school right now unless they want to move their entire family to a new school district.....

??? What? Since when can't people move? It comes down to planning and priorities, doesn't it? For instance:

1. One lives where one lives. This is just the starting point.
2. One has a child or plans for having one.
3. One defines synergistic family goals, the requirements for achieving them, and then prioritizes them. One generally will have at least nine months to do this. I realize it can take some time, but it doesn't take that long and it doesn't cost money to develop a plan for oneself and one's child.
4. One starts working to achieve the goals.
5. Child arrives.
6. One has at least a lustrum before school starts; thus one has at least that long to find and move to a new district, assuming being in the desired district for kindergarten was a priority. One might instead plan to not worry about K-to-"whatever" and focus on being in one's desired area by the time the child is "however many" years old/in XYZ grade. You get the idea...

I realize that "unanticipated stuff happens," but I also realize that having a contingency plan to mitigate the impact of all but the most exceptional "stuff" while also not compromising the top 1-3, 1 or 2 priorities is part of what one needs also to have done back at "step 3/4." If one didn't assume one's responsibility as an expectant parent, that's one's problem, and maybe it means one can't send the kid to a better public school "right now." What am I to say about that? Nothing. It is what it is.

What I do have to say about it is that if one didn't plan accordingly, and then with unyielding focus work to bring it to fruition, one really doesn't have a just basis for decrying the quality of the schools one's child must attend.

vouchers change that dynamic. They open up the ability of others to actually open up new schools right in the same neighborhoods as the bad public schools...

Perhaps in rural and some suburban areas, yes. In cities, it's considerably harder because in many of them, there simply is no physical spot to put the school. That's not all cities. Detroit probably could find space. Ditto perhaps Cleveland, and others. On the other hand, D.C., NYC, SF, Chicago, and others like them that are very crowded and land/rents are very high, probably not so likely.