Comments on: Turn around, end up in same place

By: scott burns

scott burns — Sun, 01 Nov 2009 14:26:24 +0000

Actually, there is a substantial body of research about how to fix schools and boost achievement. Longer school years, rich curriculum with rigorous standards, principals as teacher leaders, and master teachers who are freed up to instruct their fellow teachers. Then there is the support network that needs to be put in place to help students and families living in poverty.

What’s lacking is political will. These changes mean major changes to the educational system. No politician will support these changes because of their expense.

By: Swede

Swede — Sun, 01 Nov 2009 01:09:14 +0000

Perhaps allen, but Pell grants and the GI Bill are narrowly tailored toward college age students. We are talking here about K-12 students, and I would assume that the Supremes take a rather dim view at religious schools being funded by the public. I am no expert, but they have struck down school prayer across the spectrum, so why would they accept publicly funded religious schools? Anyway, I am not making an argument here about religious schools, but rather my focus is on the bigger issue of how how educational system would strongly benefit from competition in the form of a voucher system.

By: pm

pm — Sat, 31 Oct 2009 20:54:01 +0000

Swede,

That’s a good question. Why any amount? I just think that money is the real issue and not vouchers.

By: allen

allen — Sat, 31 Oct 2009 20:13:52 +0000

Too bad the Supreme Court doesn’t see things your way then Swede since there’s nothing wrong with religious schools getting government money and there hasn’t been for a long time. Check out Pell Grants and G.I. Bill education benefits.

By: Swede

Swede — Sat, 31 Oct 2009 18:47:09 +0000

Why would it be $50,000 a year? The vouchers would simply be i the amount that it costs to educated the average student in the district (or state, but district makes more sense as it is more locally oriented). The parent/guardian gets the amount to transfer to a school of their choice. I know that some people will object to the following, but religious schools (under my plan) will not be allowed to take part of the public voucher plan. They will have to remain as privately funded schools. Once we start funding religious schools, it is only a matter of time that maddrassas start applying for funding and there is no way to deny them if other religious schools have been accepted, so religious schools are out of the equation. Of course parents can always pay for private religious schools or sunday schools, but not on the public dime.

By: pm

pm — Sat, 31 Oct 2009 07:40:34 +0000

If vouchers were $50,000/year/student, would there be a good reason as a parent to turn that money down? I’m looking for something more that telling me that it better be a real voucher that can be spent where you’d like. And I already know that this would be a huge burden on the tax-payers probably bankrupting many states. I only mention this as it seeems that vouchers are a red-herring. Its not vouchers people are opposed to its the amount of the vouchers that is contentious. Well, maybe people are opposed in principal to vouchers supporting religious eduction. Thoughts?

By: Swede

Swede — Sat, 31 Oct 2009 02:45:15 +0000

I am a firm believer in the free market. Government should provide a check that is only transferrable to schools to every student. Schools of all types (including those who focus on and specialize in special education and English Language Learners and any other type of group that needs special requirements) will pop up and blossom. Voucherize the entire system.

By: Ben F

Ben F — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 14:23:40 +0000

Roger,

Other countries do much better at educating the whole gamut of kids. The salient difference between their systems and ours, it seems to me, is that their content-rich curricula build a solid foundation for achievement in the early grades. By the time their kids reach 7th grade, MOST have mastered math, science, etc. to a degree that many of our 12th graders have not. There is no way to turn around a high school whose students are the victims of a bankrupt elementary ed. There’s too much repair work to be done. By that point, frustration with failure has bred myriad behavior problems. What we CAN do is prevent failed high schools by modeling our elementary schools’ curricula on those of Finland, India, Japan, Taiwan and the other countries that do unionized public education for all successfully.

By: Clix

Clix — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 13:57:21 +0000

it’s not clear charter operators want to take over.

Wait – you mean even those who are running charter programs don’t see them as a magic bullet?

By: Roger Sweeny

Roger Sweeny — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 12:32:45 +0000

starting new schools and having control over hiring, length of day, student recruitment, and more gives us a pure opportunity to prove that low-income kids can achieve at the same levels as their more affluent peers.”

If you get to choose your students (including the opportunity to say, “buy in to the school culture or leave”), you have an opportunity to be successful. If you are a local public school that has to keep everyone, you may be screwed.

In a better world, we would allow all schools to be selective–and provide alternatives to those youngsters who can’t or won’t succeed in a regular school.