School Vouchers | Let's Talk | NPR
Вставка
- Опубліковано 28 вер 2024
- School vouchers are a controversial issue. NPR Ed correspondent Cory Turner offers a primer on how private school vouchers work and the arguments for and against them.
• Read "The Promise and Peril of School Vouchers" at n.pr/2psFwFz
• Listen "Indiana's School Choice Program Often Underserves Special Needs Students" at n.pr/2pQ5z55
• Read "Lessons On Race And Vouchers From Milwaukee" at n.pr/2rmKZeD
• Read "For Families With Special Needs, Vouchers Bring Choices, Not Guarantees" at n.pr/2rqBU4p
• Read "Lessons From The Nation's Oldest Voucher Program" at n.pr/2qBg5RI
------------------------------------------------------
Subscribe to NPR on UA-cam: / npr
Follow NPR elsewhere, too:
• Twitter: / npr
• Facebook: / npr
• Instagram: / npr
• Tumblr: / npr
• Snapchat: / npr
ABOUT NPR
NPR connects to audiences on the air, on demand, online, and in person. More than 26 million radio listeners tune in to NPR stations each week and more than 36 million unique visitors access NPR.org each month making NPR one of the most trusted sources of news and insights on life and the arts. NPR is also the leading publisher of podcasts, with 36 original shows and an average of 4 million listeners per week. NPR shares compelling stories, audio and photos with millions of social media users on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Pinterest, UA-cam and Snapchat; NPR News and NPR One apps, online streaming, podcasts, iTunes radio and connected car dashboards help meet audiences where they are. NPR's live events bring to the stage two-way conversations between NPR hosts and the audience in collaboration with the public radio Member Station community. This robust access to public service journalism makes NPR an indispensable resource in the media landscape.
Why can’t we just try to fix our schools?
yeah idk, anytime I ask an American who opposes government funded welfare and social programs I always hear long and convoluted responses that always seem to place an inordinate amount of blame onto lower class households then the corporations who actually lobby for these awful programs, operations and institutions i.e. your medical system, school system, justice system and prisons and I guess public transport (or lack there of). But I think there's hope because I see far more people like you who recognise this then those who don't
@@frags4679these low IQ conservatives just operate on fear and reactionism. there is no convincing them, there are literally schools in my state that can deny you based on your religion, and they get MY TAX DOLLARS so these fascist idiots can keep teaching bullshit
Get rid of the public education system
@@frags4679you are the problem none of that is true read a book
Why shouldn't voucher schools be able to "cherry pick" high performing children? Since when did children become a public resources. The implication here is that public schools need studious, courteous, obedient children to sit in-between the loud, obnoxious, disorganized children. This makes a class of 26 kids easier to manage when the t a her can ignore the 12 "good" children. Also, the $13,000 per head allowed for the good children is redistributed, with maybe $3,000 being spend on them while $40,000 can be spent on the special needs kids. That's what this "cherry picking" "problem" is all about. Why wouldn't the parents not "good" students not want to take them out of that system and put them somewhere they won't be ignored, but challenged to grow to their full potential?
That's a very good argument.
Besides Public School...
Prison is the only other Government Institution which doesn't allow a family to choose location & institution....
We get to choose which Post Office to drop our mail or rent a P.O. Box... we can choose which EDD or DMV office to do business... we choose which Junior College and State College to attend or which Metro Station, Bus or Train to take.. We choose which parks and beaches to visit...and which Libraries to checkout books...
Can't be religious schools, it goes against separation of Church and State.
I keep watching these videos to see a downside to vouchers and have yet to find any that are established enough to fight against them.
Did you watch the same video everyone else did?
@@weezyfkitty
I just watched it again and stand by my comment.
The only things this video really brings up was that it diverts money from public schools to private schools and that private schools can cherry pick students.
I don’t care about either of these. The second one is only problematic if there isn’t a public school for these students to go to. It says studies have shown that students who stay in the public schools actually improve under this system as well.
@@weezyfkitty
What issues with vouchers do you have?
@@crw662 I think the funniest thing is that people talk like picking and choosing students is a bad thing, but that's something that I support 100%. Public schools should be able to remove students who are violent, instead of the current system we have where they are just shuffled from classroom to classroom to disrupt hundreds of students' educations in the name of "being fair". It's insanity. Also, if public schools are competing for voucher dollars, then school funding wouldn't be so tightly coupled to testing performance metrics. If parents know a school is good and it has some good-intentioned children who are non-violent, the vouchers would still flow to that school independent of the testing grades of the less intelligent ones.
@@VaShthestampede2
The problem is, they are not just choosing students based on behavior issues. They can choose to not take students with severe learning disabilities of varying types. This means that for many of these students, the only place for them will be the public school system that will be too underfunded to properly give them the support they need.
That is the issue I have found in other research. I still think it is likely a good system and these issues could be worked on to minimize.
It pisses me off that at 2:18 you say “loss ground” without defining what that means and by what metric standard because if it’s relative to their class than that’s not a viable statistic but if it’s overall then it is
It is ironic that this argument parallels some of the issues we have with our higher education system in the fact vouchers (which in this example, can be compared to scholarships and grants since the "student" would not be responsible for paying it back) are finite-based the budget allocation of the state funding. There are no controls on how much a "better choice " private school would charge its students which results in the total tuition not being cover in whole. This is left on the family to make up the difference and for many of the families whose incomes are already stretched. it introduces a unnecessary financial hardship. This also doesn't account for the extra costs and fees for activities that families with higher incomes can absorb. Are the same supporters of school vouchers going to be willing to raise your taxes to cover the eventual increase in tuition costs for these schools? Also, there is a cultural impact between the "well to do" and the "we know how you got in this school" dynamic that could ultimately result in further alienation and potential dropouts as the child's tenure in the private school continues to through high school. Tell me how tax funded school vouchers makes sense in the long run...
Well let the people use the property taxes they pay in their mortgage to choose the schools they want
That increases class separation and punishes the poor
That's how public schools are funded where I live in tennessee. It's a no state income tax state so they fund schools with the property taxes that they get from the homes in the area immediately surrounding school. So what does that mean? It means that schools and white suburban areas get a whole lot more money than the poor schools and impoverished areas.
@@jacksonislegendSo what?
@@gurupurkhaSo it's less likely that people lift themselves out of poverty with their poorly funded education.
@@CharlesPrygood
Everyone wants them. It's the future and the best thing for our kids.
To say this is something that “benefit students” blatantly ignores the wide spread corruption that has plagued programs and ideas similar to this. The voucher schools, by definition, are private schools and DO NOT have to follow the same rules and laws as public schools do. They are also governed by PRIVATELY APPOINTED BOARD of DIRECTORS. When there is no oversight people will swindle away tax dollars. Still not convinced... then check the facts and stats yourself for voucher schools... go for it!
That's awesome that as a parent you like the public school where your child is being educated. Don't you believe other parents should have the right to approve of the education their child is receiving? We don't have to dismantle the public schools. Give every parent a voucher and maybe the vast majority of parents will voluntarily stay in the public schools? But if your argument now that other parents might choose a bad school for their children, and you therefore need to restrict their choice and choose for their children, well wtf? Who made children a public resource? Those children belong to those parents. If Christians, Jews, and Muslims want their children to learn in a different environment from the unisex bathrooms ... If a parent whants a school that doesn't have new common core math, if another parent wants M,W,F part-time high school so their child can start a trade skill, if another parent wants an all-boys school targeted to high-energy students whose parents don't want their kids on drugs to sit for 8 hours a day..... Who do you think you are to force them into a one-size-fots-all? Parents will vote with their feet and leave bad charter/private schools, and get in line for their who have proved a good name for themselves.
if the education is mandatory under current law and the citizens are taxed toward education then why not give these very citizens a choice where to take their kids given that the voucher reflects an average spent on student - lowering the voucher dollar amount compared to average cost of education is unfair - not giving a family an equal choice.
The proposed amendment he used should not be included in deliberations since 1) the education is mandatory, 2) the parents are taxed regardless to which school they take their kids - religious or not - so that is unambiguously out.
Under the current system (where everyone is taxed toward education, 2) education is mandatory) those that can't afford private school aren't given a choice - they are stuck with a public school system whether they like it or not. so why not avoid a situation of no choice if there is a possibility - definitely, this might be a majority's situation - they don't like their assigned school district, but aren't given a choice of school, however they are taxed just like everybody else.
The final math will end up as following: those, currently using private education (let's not mind they tax deductions for a moment, even though they are significant) will be granted vouchers. this will be offset (never mind the tax benefits they are claiming today) by the reduction in size of Dept. of Ed, it's wasteful bureaucracy (a few hundred billion there), it's fraud (another undoubtedly huge chunk of cash), it's uniformity ( a curriculum that might not be desirable by everyone). On the other hand, the choice, given to parents, their mindfulness over the matter and resulting added responsibility for their kid's education. Plus, the better performing already existing public school system that will have to compete for students now.
Another benefit that might come from this is the creation of new private schools that will be dynamic enough to offer a desired curriculum.
Maybe the biggest benefit of all may be the better accountability given to parents for their kids education - the market doesn't bare failure, schools will have to provide a quality product in order to compete, teachers will be incensed and motivated to perform in this new setting - no slack will be tolerated by students and parents that see exactly where their money goes, and slack will be tolerated by a school administration since they are also among those motivated to perform. and stay in business. And there is nothing wrong with business if dollars can make your kid have better language skills, know more math, behave better and be generally motivated to learn. Knowing that it is not a free affair helps that a lot.
I don't know what other reasons the socialists have against free choice, but, personally, I'd prefer a choice instead of not having one and this, essentially, what the argument for or against vouchers is about, FREE CHOICE.
Can't use tax money on religious institutions.
@@troywest7045 why not? Don’t religious people pay taxes like everybody else?
@@troywest7045 can’t use the money on religious, but sure can tax them.
Notice he gave only part of what the first amendment states instead of fully laying it out.
It’s not even a 3 minute video meant to summarize a complex topic that has been going on for decades now. Unless you’re a college kid struggling to reach a word count on an essay you procrastinated on, I don’t really see the point of including the whole first amendment. Especially when the important Supreme Court case mentioned immediately after had to do with only the establishment clause of the first amendment.
@@Tdwt18 we know the games you libturds play in order to destroy the constitution hate. This amendment can be stated in under thirty seconds so dont act like its a recital of war and peace.
Why should I pay to educate someone else's children? Parents should be taxed extra to pay for their kid's education.
Moron. If you don't have an interest in educating the next generation because those kids belong to someone else, then don't tax the parents at all. Let them decide how to spend their money on their children. The only reason to tax a parent, and then hand them a school or hand it back to them as a voucher with rules is because the politician (or society in general) doesn't trust the parent to choose a school wisely, and intends to "help" the parent decide how to spend their money. So either you are about making sure the children are educated appropriately, or you don't. If you CARE, then put your money where your mouth is. If you don't care, then get out of the parents' way and stop interfering.
You already do
What in the f is this guy talking about?! The study, which he sources, does not say anything about students in the program loosing ground, let alone significantly! Did they even read the studies? One of the studies even says, "in three to four years the voucher-eligible schools will have improved by one standard deviation"!!
I like how NPR pretends to be in the middle on this. School Vouchers is about choice, how it get funded is another topic. The fact that were arguing whether someone has to keep their kids in shitty schools raises questions. Whether vouchers work or not putting the choice in the parents hands should be fought for imho.
Democrats prove there real intentions by there opposition to the school voucher. They don't want black kids getting an equal education.
democrats are really that primitive not to see this simple situation as choice/no choice. they did however, managed to learn how to change a subject - bringing that old proposed amendment was a bit of a tricky move, (dissolved with a simple argument that education is mandatory, we all pay taxes towards it and putting your kid in a religious school (they omitted that there) is also YOUR choice).
Real talk brother! They don’t want black and Hispanic kids in the same school as their “precious” white kids
Eric Larsen the White Liberal sees blacks and Hispanic Americans as their pets, at least they use to, now they seem to have moved on to Gays, Trans and Illegal Aliens. If you can’t see that then you’re either dumb or lying to yourself
I have the solution to the school choice issue : allow parents to send their kids to any school in the city that they want and they will find a good school in most cities : there would be no need for vouchers
How can anyone oppose school choice? Seriously - how can you oppose it?
People say it takes $ from the public schools. Do we pay hospitals whether they treat patients or not? So why should we pay schools whether they educate the students or not?
People say it helps rich people. I'm sorry, are rich people banned from public schools? If we're subsidizing rich people anyway, why do we limit them to in-kind subsidies rather than cash?
And if rich people aren't using public schools, what does that say about public schools? Are you claiming rich people are stupid or evil & thus that they have trapped their kids in inferior schools? Or are you willing to admit that rich people put their kids in private schools because those schools are BETTER? Shouldn't MORE kids have access to better schools?
People say the vouchers aren't enough to pay for private schools. We spend $15k per child on public education, so raise the vouchers to $15k & problem solved. (You don't get to place artificial limits on vouchers & then complain that the limits YOU set are too low!).
People say vouchers promote segregation - like public schools aren't segregated! Ha! I don't remember when the National Guard had to desegregate private schools; do you? If any institution has a history of segregation, it's public education.
Folks, none of the anti-choice arguments are serious - they're just make-weights to justify a pre-determined conclusion. People who hate choice hate choice; they want to control the $ & the kids; they don't care about the consequences for students.
Here's the real choice: do you want a DEAD public school student or a LIVE private school student? Because public schools are factories of mental illness, anxiety & despair. Even if private schools don't improve education per se, they improve children's mental health; isn't that enough? How many kids have to be RAPED & ABUSED by public schools? How many kids have to KILL themselves or ABUSE drugs as a result of public schools? Can't we say enough is enough? Kids do better when they're empowered to choose schools that work for them. Public education CANNOT be as individually tailored as private education precisely because it's designed to be equitable - to give everybody the same thing at the same time.
If you care about kids, let them be free.
Can't use tax money on religious institutions.
I like how the talked about cherry picking data, tgen cherry picked data. Funny
What was the cherry picked data?
They didn't talk about cherry-picking data; they talked about some schools cherry-picking students. Did you actually listen at all?
Students lose ground because the public schools require so little of them,that it's hard to get up to speed.
Spoken like someone who hasn’t been in school for a long time.
@Vospader21 I'm teacher that's worked in two different districts, and he's right. The bar in public schools is floor level.
Sounds like bad parenting to me, shifting blame for parental incompetence. Teachers aren't miracle workers and not there to codify everyone's special little child. If a parent wants to home school, go ahead, the world needs ditch diggers too.
Great idea. But your gonna tell me how the state schools should be the only choice. Nah
You can fix this all by getting rid of the department of education
National propaganda radio
So if it benefits student left in public schools doesn’t that undercut the argument that voucher programs defund and thereby damage the capacity of public schools to thrive? Either the lack of funding is somehow beneficial to public schools (seems unlikely), or the lack of students is beneficial to public schools (which would seem to be consistent with the massive amount of data on class size, administrative staff to student ratio etc), not to mention, if the public schools still receive *any* of the funding for that student that participated in the voucher program, then they are better off on the ‘funding per student’ metric as well. Seem like pretty thin arguments against voucher programs.
its possible that the benefit doesn't scale up to widespread voucher use
@@deejaybundst1671 That would be at best a hypothesis....and one that wasn't put forward here It's hardly enough to be stridently against voucher programs.
I that it means the worst parents with the worst kids are using the voucher program to leave the public school system to the benefit of the kids who stay. I might have to reconsider my position on this issue.
@@MrLlipp That’s not what it means...
Voucher students receive less money that they would in a state school... uh yea that's the whole fucking point. Government spends 100 times more than a private school to educate a student. The whole point is to save taxpayer money by punishing wasteful and poor schools.
Government - out of Education. It's good enough to collect taxes towards it. No more. We will find teachers for our kids better than a stupid dept of ed. VOUCHERS! 100 %.
Public education is a government organization. So this doesn't make sense. Only private schools are untouched by the government.
Vouchers would be great. The government should not be free from the most basic of competitive forces: letting a person choose where their kid goes to school. Public schools are run like old USSR programs.
So basically poor people pay for rich peoples kids to go to school while the bare minimum education for their own children gets defunded
How would poor people pay for rich peoples schooling if the rich kids arent going to those schools?
@@Frazier16 because charter schools are paid for with tax dollars
Government officials arent putting their own kids in public schools so what's this cherry picking talk about? They offer a product even they don't believe in.
Blaine Blaine, James G. Blaine, the Continental liar from the state of Maine.
Florida has a tax credit program to circumvent our Blaine amendment. What percentage of a donation becomes a tax credit?
Cherries are not to scale 😭😭😭😭
Following Blaine’s principal, public servants shouldn’t be allowed to donate to religious charity or institutions. Which is ridiculous.
Yet private schools spend less and do better than public schools ;)
The more educated a child is, the more likely they are to make better decisions in their lives and less likely to become a drain on society. A better education, therefore, benefits everyone.
Wow, just plain old common sense can improve things. Imagine that .Well said my friend
The voucher program guts public school funding and lowers standards of education for all public students, and that includes students who wanted to go private and were denied, such as if they have a disability or are a low performer
Then we should get rid of welfare
NPR your so full of it
The main downside that I see with vouchers is that there will invariable never be enough to go around and most of them will end up going to middle and upperclass families who don’t really need them. Because the private market always skews towards the wealthy.
I kinda disagree. Weathy families who want to send thier kids to private school already do. And many kids who dont come from rich families go to private school. So i dont think that will be an issue
Students should get the full amount it would cost the public school to teach them for the year.
I don't get it. It's like the government is trying to absolve itself of the responsibility to provide good quality, free education to children. If you want to homeschool or send your kid to Catholic school do it out of your own pocket. The government's responsibility is to fund the highest quality education possible, within the restraints of it's budget of course, but always trying to do better.
Thank you.
Well presented!
With its recently passed voucher expansion law, Arizona now has the most expansive voucher program in the country. Over the loud and continuous opposition of the citizens of Arizona, Governor Ducey pushed SB1431 through the legislature--Betsy DeVos tweeted her congrats to him right after he signed the bill. But the citizens of Arizona have had enough privatizing of public education. We are nearly last for teacher pay and student achievement. There's a grassroots, statewide, all volunteer effort to repeal SB1431 and demand that our lawmakers support public education. We support school choice, but we do NOT support the voucher expansion. We want good choices for the majority of AZ kids and families who choose public schools.
Well, that would force more kids into the more expensive public schools and waste money. www.cato.org/publications/policy-analysis/they-spend-what-real-cost-public-schools
Well said. In the 6 years since your comment this problem has gotten a lot worse
God forbid parents who PAY TAXES can send their children to the school of their choice WITH THEIR OWN TAX MONEY.
Once it's tax money, it's government money and once it's government money it can't go to religious institutions.
I support the voucher program except for one thing, those vouchers shouldn't be allowed to used in private religious schools that discriminate gays and disregard for basic scientific facts like Evolution.
Why not allowed? Because the Constitution states that there is a Separation of Church and State.
Wrong. The Constitution says government shall not ESTABLISH a state religion. And todays public school system comes pretty damn near establishing the state religion of atheism. Freedom of religion isn't freedom FROM religion. Our country wasn't founded by men who longed for the day when all people could be free from believing in a god. Our government was founded by men who were tired of their European kings telling them what to believe about God. You have to be Protestant. You have to be Catholic. You can't be a Jew..... So when you say all parents will be taxed, and all children will be offered a free atheist education, and if parents have money left over they can send their kids to one of those religious schools, well how is that NOT an establishing of a state "religion"? Values, morals, how to decide what is right and wrong, where did we come from, what is our purpose, what does a "better" world look like, is what religion is about. Public schools answer these questions from an atheist point of view. I would rather my child learn them from a Christian point of view. And since school is 40 hours per week, I don't think an hour on Sunday is enough to counter 40 hours of atheism....
If educating children in Christianity (yes, many Christian's read Genesis) is an idea society just can't condone, why not outlaw Christian schools? Would this be the perfect enactment of "separation of church and state"? Your understanding is so biased. How can you not see atheism is a religious system? And making it so poor Christians must by law present their children to atheist schools 40hours a week is a milder version of the "stolen children" of the Native Americans. You don't like the parents' beliefs, so you'll use government to take their children (for the good of the children and society of course) and raise them to confirm to YOUR view of the world? Hypocrite. Our constitution protects our freedom OF religion.
If you cannot stand that "government" money be spent on Christian schools, then leave the Christian parents alone. Stop taxing them, so that the parents will still have money in their pockets to afford the Christian schools themselves. But as it is now, the parents are taxed and then told it isn't their money which funds the schools, it's "government money"
@@ludwigvonmiseswasright4380 Came here to tell you atheism isn't a religion. Just passing info along.
@@ludwigvonmiseswasright4380Really? Deists like Jefferson, Adams, Madison, Paine, Franklin would beg to differ and they wouldn't be happy about the pledge or our currency either.
The United States of America should have a foundation free from the influence of clergy.
George Washington
This would be the best of all possible worlds, if there were no religion in it.
John Adams
Erecting the 'wall of separation between church and state'... is absolutely essential in a free society.
Thomas Jefferson
The Bible: a history of wickedness that has served to corrupt and brutalise mankind.
Thomas Paine
There is not one redeeming feature in our superstition of Christianity. It has made one half the world fools, and the other half hypocrites.
Thomas Jefferson
The study of theology, as it stands in Christian churches, is the study of nothing; it is founded on nothing; it rests on no principles; it proceeds by no authorities; it has no data; it can demonstrate nothing; and it admits of no conclusion.
Thomas Paine
It may not be easy, in every possible case, to trace the line of separation between the rights of religion and the Civil authority with such distinctness as to avoid collisions and doubts on unessential points. The tendency to unsurpastion on one side or the other, or to a corrupting coalition or alliance between them, will be best guarded agst. by an entire abstinence of the Gov't from interfence in any way whatsoever, beyond the necessity of preserving public order, and protecting each sect agst. trespasses on its legal rights by others.
James Madison
Would this apply for college education? Also, a problem I see with school vouchers is that we are diverting public funding to private schools (simply because they are in fact better than our current public system). This will further decrease funding in the public sector, because the private schools will be overrun and obviously cannot handle a large amount of students, so they will have to turn a lot of kids away. In principle, I do not believe public funding needs to be given to PRIVATE school. They are in the private sector and should stay that way. What is to say that rich parents couldn't bribe their way into elite private schools and take a spot from a low-income voucher kid? We see this happen in college education already.
Secondly, I think we need to focus on improve our public education and putting more money into it, instead of private education systems. This benefits a much larger portion of our children population, since only a small percentage go to private schools. Public schools, although underfunded, teach valuable life lessons. When you grow up in a bubble, you tend to be an adult that lives in a bubble. In short, I think the long-term solution is more funding into PUBLIC EDUCATION. My grandmother was an educator for many public school systems in the midwest and greatly disliked DeVos. I think DeVos' intentions are.. okay, but her solution can easily be bent to favor her private school buddies by allowing them to garner public funding, which it should not be used for.
Increase funding for public schools, I was thankfully raised in a well-funded public school (thankfully due to fundraisers), but I was one of the lucky ones. We spend an enormous amount on the military in wars that could have been avoided. Divert that money into our children, especially the ones who need it the most-- our middle and lower class children!
I see a couple of problems with the arguments put forward here I am just going to list it out for the sake of keeping myself organized:
1) Yes they do work for colleges? Isn’t that my argument? You get to choose we’re you go to college, the government subsidizes your choice. This subsidy can pay for the entire thing or if you want to pay more you can. Yea seems to work pretty well actually.
2) A voucher system diverts funding from public schools only if it is the parents choice. These parents are not choosing private schools because they need to, they just tend to because as you point out “they are in fact better than our current system”.
3) I am failing to see the problem with decreasing funding to a system that is not performing well. Voucher systems do decrease the number of students in public schools, that’s kinda the point. As you said private/semi-private schools perform better.
4) Public schools that have decreasing funding also have less student to take care of and also get to keep all the capital and investments previously made. No I don’t agree that they will be overrun, I think they will actually be taking care of less students while keeping quite a bit of funding they no longer require.
5) Nothing is being taken from public schools and given to private schools, it is literally the opposite. Money starts off in private hands, it is no longer being taken from private hands and given to public schools. I agree this money should stay in the private sector in private hands.
6) The only reason public schools educate a larger percentage of students is because you cannot choose otherwise. I also disagree that public schools are underfunded. They aren’t underfunded, they are wildly inefficient, as evidenced that in private/semi-private hands less money is used to get better results. Private schools are not bubbles, not anymore than public schools are. I mean in my experience public school is a bubble, it is where I got babysat for 4 years while I got really high. It’s only at college when I needed to apply myself.
5) Throwing more money at a system that is clearly not working is not a good idea it honestly seem ideological. I don’t mean to be the typical “dats socialism!!” kind of argument, but I mean it really does scream Soviet to me. Incentivizing poor performance is what crushed their economy, if you are in an underperforming industry your superiors give you more money.
6) As for De-Vos’ solutions being bent in favor of her private school buddies is again a purely ideological attack as far as I can see because being in favor of vouchers and also being supported private/semi-private schools is not in anyway surprising. You could say the same about any Democrat and their public school buddies.
7) As for funding public schools, they will have all the funding they need if they can convince parents that they are worth it. Incentivizing public school staff to do worse because they will get more money from it is not a good way of thinking it is a religious way of thinking.
I think these arguments are 100% ideology, they are self contradictory and not based around facts.
Private schools run on the concept of self-interest. If the local McDonalds has so many people ordering at it that they have to turn people away, we would expect another McDonalds to show up very soon or a larger one to be built.
It's absolutely necessary to have some national standard to make sure that an average citizen have the basic knowledge to operate in a civilized society, especially in case of those students who supposed to work for the public sector, in which case there have to be a solid institution which organizes a state-program where the students are tested at least once in their life, but outside of that, the public schools are completely unnecessary, and the private schools are doing a much better job at preparing the students for such a test in case of parents who are incapable of home-schooling their children, so long as there are the education-vouchers.
I think vouchers are okay but there should be strict regulations, requiring that schools receiving vouchers teach children at least as much as a public school (at least the same content). This would mean religious schools could tech their religion so long as they are still teaching all other content.
Jon Thor yeah, but I feel like that would just happen naturally as they fight to convince more students and more parents to go to their school.
The public sector sadly cannot get involved with the private sector, never can and never will.. We already have a monopoly among public schools and the only competitors are private schools.. The reason education is so mediocre in the first place when it comes to Public Education is that they are all held to the same standard and there is no competition for public schools except for private schools.. Competition ensures quality and public schools right now have a hard time competing with one another.. The Public sector is also limited, limited resources with not much advancements being made and it doesn't matter how much of your tax dollars you dump into it, it will always be the same.. It's just a money wasting machine..
No they don't have the same regulations. They don't even give them same common core testing that they have made public schools do.
SMH,private schools teach MORE and the education is much better.
When was the last time a POTUS sent their kids to public schools in DC? Case closed....
I see some people oppose 'vouchers' for children but support housing vouchers for the poor. Hypocrit much?