Foxfyre wrote:Parados writes
Quote:It is this kind of logic that gets you into trouble Fox. If someone says you like blue and you disagree does that mean only the complementary color is the right answer? No, it doesn't.
No, your analogy is wrong. The disagreement has nothing to do with preference but with policy. If I say vouchers is the way to go and C.I. says I am wrong, would it not logically follow that C.I. thinks vouchers are not the way to go?
No, it doesn't mean that at all. It could mean that vouchers alone are not the solution. Vouchers may be part of the solution but alone they solve nothing. They only create more problems as I will point out later in this post.
Quote:
Parados writes
Quote:What is the job of schools as you see it? If you don't clearly define the goal then how can you possibly come up with a solution?
Schools have a job to try to teach children. That comes with many problems. Lack of money won't solve those problems.
Giving the students vouchers won't solve that problem. It might benefit a few but fails to address the needs of the many. Refusing to accept unruly kids goes directly against "No child left behind" since it purposely leaves behind any child ruled to be a problem.
You don't solve the problem of children failing to learn by refusing to teach them. That is directly opposite of the stated goal.
You'll have to go back many pages and through many posts in this thread as I have commented on all these points at length. But to summarize, of cource vouchers won't solve all the problems. There has to be serious systemic changes in the public schools before even most of the problems will be addressed, much less solved.
What problems? you don't define them. You only state there are problems but don't address the specific problems with specific issues and possible solutions.
Quote:
The virtue of vouchers is that it opens opportunity to many who can otherwise only dream about the advantages enjoyed by the rich. A working class family who cannot afford a private school education for their kids might, however, be able to swing the difference between the value of the voucher and the school tuition.
Public schools receive funding based on enrollment. If enrollment starts falling off, as it might with a voucher system, they no longer have guaranteed funding for mediocre performance. They will have to make those critical systemic changes to lure the money back to them. That working class family who knows the child will have the same positive enviroment and quality education in the public school as the child will receive in a private school will be more than happy to turn in the voucher to the public school and not have to worry about digging up the balance of private school tuition.
Here is the failure of your simple voucher plan. It destroys the school system without a solution in place to replace it. Some simple facts. It costs money to become more efficient. In the business world it costs money to revamp and retool a plant. It actually costs money to lay off workers because you have severance packages, retirement expenses, the costs of shutting down buildings. Look at the financials for any company that is going through restructuring. The upfront costs of any efficiency plan far outweigh the cost of continuing operations. The goal is to spend money now to save money later. Taking money away from schools doesn't make them more efficient at all. It makes them fail. Taking money away from the schools only makes sure that they can't become efficient because they won't be able to afford to do it. They can't make any critical changes to lure children back because they won't have the money to do that.
If a school goes from 500 students to 250 because of vouchers the infrastructure costs don't go down with fewer kids. You still have to heat the entire school. You still have to repair the entire roof. If you consolidate 2 schools and shut one down you have added the cost of transportation to get children to a school that is further away. Costs per student go UP when you reduce the number of kids because of the basic costs required. The only places to cut are salaries which doesn't get you a better education at all.
Quote:It's really simple. Those who depend on public schools for their livelihood won't change if they don't have to. Make it profitable for them to do so, however, and I guarantee you they will.
I don't see how you are making it profitable for them. You are punishing them for failure then punishing them further for failing again. Meanwhile the REAL people being punished are the children. You have stated the desired goal was to "TEACH THE KIDS". Now you are ignoring that goal to talk about "profit." Schools are not a for profit business that should fail if it doesn't do its job well. The people punished are not the workers and business owners if a school fails. It is the KIDS that are.
Quote:
We don't have to keep operating in a system that is proving again and again that it isn't doing the job. The United States school system was once one of the world's most excellent. It can be again. It only takes the public will to do it.
I always love this one. When was the US school system the best in the world? Provide evidence of that and evidence that it is worse now. Yes, US schools have problems. But they have always had problems. Its the nature of trying to teach to different people. There is no such thing as 100% success rate. But what is the REAL COMPARISON here? You have declared a problem without checking to see if the problem really exists as you think it does.
Quote:
So far as your question: what is the job of the schools? You answered it yourself. The job of the schools is to educate children. The public schools are not getting the job done.
I think the voucher system might be so effective, the Federal government could probably scrap NCLB and go to a more reasonable system.
If the job is to educate children then how does making it more difficult to educate them actually achieve your goal? Children are not widgets that we can stop production for 2 years while we build a new factory. If you lose 2 years of a child's education you won't get it back. If the present success rate is 60% with children where is your evidence that vouchers will create a better success rate? I don't see where taking money away from schools will make them more successful. Lets say vouchers eventually are given to 20% of students. That means that fly by night schools will spring up to steal money and not educate children. We are seeing that already around the country. It isn't all private and charter schools but it is enough that it makes the news quite regularly around the country. Vouchers will lead to shysters that swoop in, make money for a few years until their system is shown to be failing and then they will move on to another place to do the same thing over again. The people hurt will be the kids left without an education.
