Are Vouchers Enough? [Archive] - Sean Hannity Discussion

page017

August 17th, 2009, 1:09 am

There seems to be the implication of federal involvement in this. Education is a local and personal issue, parental involvement is key.
Education is not a right.

Here's the thing, there doesn't need to be significant parental involvement to use a voucher. Kid comes home, tells mommy that Billy is going to the school two towns over, and he wants to go there too. Mom signs form... It doesn't necessarily mean the parent will really research where they are going, or will expect the best from their children.

Let's say you've got a school with 60% pretty good students, 40% not so good. The good students parents feel their child is being compromised by the not so good students, so they use the vouchers to send their kids to a different school. Most bad parents don't realize they are the problem, they just blame the schools for their childs lack of motivation, so they send their kid off to the good school too.

There's no easy way to get ahead without hard work and sacrifice. My parents used a sort of voucher when I was a kid. The district they were in wasn't all that great, so they rebudgeted, did their homework to find a town with a great school, and moved there. It required a bit longer commute to work, but they felt it was worth it to get me a good education. Most things that are free and easy end up not getting appreciated.

akarra

August 17th, 2009, 1:10 am

I hear you, but I can honestly say that while the "socialism" rhetoric works with some, it's not as effective as it used to be. Case in point: I've been reading right-wing publications for a good 15 years now, and I'm 30, and when I see all the "Clinton" stickers with the C like a hammer and sickle, or the Obama logo made the same way, I'm like "eh."

I think the key to your argument is this:

Heavy Progressive Income Tax.
Abolition of Rights of Inheritance.
Confiscation of Property Rights.

Those three are serious problems - there will always be fights re: private property, it'll never be entirely sacrosanct. It can't be, we're social beings. But cases like this demonstrate a serious problem (http://www.reason.com/news/show/125538.html), and a general disregard for property rights is absolutely fostered by schools nowadays - that we most certainly agree on. Conservatives, of course, haven't helped this issue by displaying a problematic attitude towards education themselves: I hate to admit this, but it's pretty clear a book like Kirk's "The Conservative Mind" has no chance against "The Savage Nation" nowadays.

page017

August 17th, 2009, 1:23 am

Fair enough. The irony is that we have rudiments of such a system in place, with No Child Left Behind - no one likes it, but the improvements for quite a few schools have been dramatic, and it does set a standard.

I should say that one thing vouchers do is increase transparency by a hundredfold. At the very least, people know how much school costs per-pupil. That's information almost "hidden" now, the way things work.

Vouchers will add to cost per pupil though. Kids will have to be transported a greater distance, creating new costs. And schools that recieve an influx of new students will have to build to accomodate them. What I'm worried about is it will result in kids moving district to district every year. A school builds one year to accomate more students, then 5 years later, the wind blows a different way and they've got empty space. My own observations have been that students who move from school to school tend to perform worse than those who have stayed in place. And I'm also concerned that this will lead to a continuation of the policies that make a school look good on paper, when there are really a lot of problems. NCLB makes sure minimum requirements are met. NY gives a regents exam in english. You must pass it in order to graduate. At a first glance, this looks tough, especially because many kids don't pass it, or just barely pass it. Our school just gave the regents to some of our sharper 9th graders, who passed it. So this test, which is supposed to represent a high schoolers total accumulation of knowledge, can be passed by a 9th grader who has been paying attention. All they have done is make the minimum requirements so low, that they really don't mean a whole lot. And the sad thing is, you still have people not meeting them.

But, if this is what schools are judged on, schools will work very hard to make sure the kids pass the test. You could have a 95% passing rate, with 30% of them passing by just a few points. But the way they measure the statistics, it ends up looking pretty good, and people say "Oh, what a great school" but you figure a third of the students would be completly incapable of using the information is any meaningful way.

My other problem with these tests, is it puts so much pressure on the teacher, that it really doesn't make sure the students are taking responsibility to learn. I can drag a kid through my class if I have to. I can get in touch with mom several times a week, make them stay after for extra help, cram review sheets down their throat until they hate me, threaten to take them off the team if they don't pass the class, and in the end, the student gets a 67%, and we both look good. But what does that prove? That I can make a kid pass, even when they really don't want to. There's something missing from the equation there. I want to see students actually caring about their future, not just going through the motions because the school is making them.

sisyphus

August 17th, 2009, 1:29 am

Page;
You make my point...a few lines past.
Expectation of excellence and assisting toward it make better sense than lowering the quality.
For example; my kids had a minimum grade to pass of 75%. And they did quite well.

As to the institutional structure that exists, the administration is overly bloated.

Akarra;
You are exactly correct, the three that you highlight, point directly at the ability of the individual to exist(life). Without life all else is moot.

akarra

August 17th, 2009, 1:35 am

You wrote: "Vouchers will add to cost per pupil though." - I need to see empirical evidence of this; so far, costs in the few voucher programs we've had have been more than reasonable, and private schools are keeping things cheaper than public - far, far cheaper, still. You might want to read the article on Milwaukee's program, and look for articles on DC's. -

The concerns about districts and building of schools ignore a key fact: all over America, privately funded education - esp. religious schools - are dying. The public school system has effectively choked the life out of it, even in areas where the graduation and college admission rates for private schools trump those of public schools decisively. You can read all about this in City Journal, esp. Sol Stern's work.

The concerns about testing are more than legitimate, but I'll say this: right now, people go around saying they're involved, but education is really alienated to a bureaucracy more or less. They'll be a lot more involved when they actually have a choice.

I should add that if you're wondering why it feels like conservatism isn't being given a chance, it absolutely is control of the classroom - again, if I sum up what I was taught all throughout high school and grade school, it was pretty much this: America killed Indians, then Brits, then black people, then people all over the world, then Vietnamese people, and this narrative was incessant, whether it was History class or English class or the need to celebrate PC holidays or whatever.

Fundamentally, this comes down to whether you think what we have is acceptable or not. Given that the teacher's unions are probably the heavy hitter in the Democratic party - add up the amount they give on opensecrets.org (http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/list.php?order=A) - and it's time for major reform, if not a revolution in education.

PhantomPholly

August 18th, 2009, 9:07 pm

Here's the thing, there doesn't need to be significant parental involvement to use a voucher. Kid comes home, tells mommy that Billy is going to the school two towns over, and he wants to go there too. Mom signs form... It doesn't necessarily mean the parent will really research where they are going, or will expect the best from their children.

Let's say you've got a school with 60% pretty good students, 40% not so good. The good students parents feel their child is being compromised by the not so good students, so they use the vouchers to send their kids to a different school. Most bad parents don't realize they are the problem, they just blame the schools for their childs lack of motivation, so they send their kid off to the good school too.

There's no easy way to get ahead without hard work and sacrifice. My parents used a sort of voucher when I was a kid. The district they were in wasn't all that great, so they rebudgeted, did their homework to find a town with a great school, and moved there. It required a bit longer commute to work, but they felt it was worth it to get me a good education. Most things that are free and easy end up not getting appreciated.

That is a straw-man argument.

Certainly a few twit parents will move their children capriciously. For those, the education is a crap-shoot anyway. Odds are 50/50 that any move is a move for the better, or a move for the worse.

However, in your example odds are BETTER than 50/50 that it will be a move for the better.

Why? Because even if Johnny's parents are both twits, there is an additional possibility that Billy's AREN'T twits.

It is the same as with any kind of shopping - eventually people figure out where the best deals are even if they are as dumb as bricks.

page017

August 19th, 2009, 12:33 am

That is a straw-man argument.

Certainly a few twit parents will move their children capriciously. For those, the education is a crap-shoot anyway. Odds are 50/50 that any move is a move for the better, or a move for the worse.

However, in your example odds are BETTER than 50/50 that it will be a move for the better.

Why? Because even if Johnny's parents are both twits, there is an additional possibility that Billy's AREN'T twits.

It is the same as with any kind of shopping - eventually people figure out where the best deals are even if they are as dumb as bricks.

But there's more to a childs education than what school they are in. I think that's a large part of my point. If a child is performing poorly, and the parents say to the kid, "It's not your fault, it was the school thats bad" and they move their child, even to a better school, will they do any better? It's just teaching them that they are not responsible for their success, someone else is.

There's also the problem that the move is itself disruptive. Especially if it takes place mid year. You move kids away from their friends, the places they know, and you move them into a different environment. It always takes a few weeks to get into the swing of things, and they are in a different system as well. Especially with a lower level kid where there are a few people who are watching out for them and have gotten to know how to get the most out of them academically. Even with a good student, there's a good chance they fall behind a few weeks with a move in the middle of the year. I did collect some statistics in my district, students who hadn't changed schools outperformed those who have moved by almost 5% in my class at least. There is something about stability that leads to better academic performance. At least from my experience. Then there's still the problem of the new school being farther away, and requiring a longer commute... Unless it's the right kid, and a much better school they are moving too, I just don't see a move making a huge difference for the positive. I am open to convincing, I just haven't been yet.

PhantomPholly

August 20th, 2009, 12:49 pm

But there's more to a childs education than what school they are in. I think that's a large part of my point. If a child is performing poorly, and the parents say to the kid, "It's not your fault, it was the school thats bad" and they move their child, even to a better school, will they do any better? It's just teaching them that they are not responsible for their success, someone else is.

Now, it has already been pointed out that this is a straw-man argument - saying the same thing in different words does not change the outcome.

Once again, some parents are dumb as bricks. Yet, even among those there are some who, after changing schools 5 times in 4 years, might finally realize where the real problem lies and start asking for real help.

The upshot is that school choice takes AWAY the excuse that it is "the school's fault" because even if the parents never move once during their child's school years they have the opportunity to try that experiment for themselves. In any event, these same hypothetical sub-moron parents of yours would not have pursued help for their miserable offspring WITHOUT the opportunity to move them - so your conclusion is incorrect.

There's also the problem that the move is itself disruptive. Especially if it takes place mid year. You move kids away from their friends, the places they know, and you move them into a different environment. It always takes a few weeks to get into the swing of things, and they are in a different system as well. Especially with a lower level kid where there are a few people who are watching out for them and have gotten to know how to get the most out of them academically. Even with a good student, there's a good chance they fall behind a few weeks with a move in the middle of the year. I did collect some statistics in my district, students who hadn't changed schools outperformed those who have moved by almost 5% in my class at least. There is something about stability that leads to better academic performance. At least from my experience. Then there's still the problem of the new school being farther away, and requiring a longer commute... Unless it's the right kid, and a much better school they are moving too, I just don't see a move making a huge difference for the positive. I am open to convincing, I just haven't been yet.

Quite the opposite would occur, I believe. Often times parents move - this is a fact of life. Perhaps to a better home, perhaps not. In any event, if they do not move far Vouchers offer the opportunity to keep their children in the same school - an option NOT available today. My personal opinion is that for every mid-semester move of a child caused by parents simply choosing to move their children to another school mid-term, there would likely be 3-4 students who were enabled to FINISH their term thanks to Vouchers.

Another factor being left out of this discussion is home-schooling. There are many highly competent parents in America who would home-school if they could, but are asked to sacrifice too much to do so (e.g. must pay taxes for schools they do not use and must ALSO forego a career). If we value our children, and likewise value those who provide them with the best possible education, then WHOEVER provides the service of educating children should be compensated - even if it is not at 100% of the rate the typical public school receives for educating a child.

page017

August 20th, 2009, 1:25 pm

Now, it has already been pointed out that this is a straw-man argument - saying the same thing in different words does not change the outcome.

Once again, some parents are dumb as bricks. Yet, even among those there are some who, after changing schools 5 times in 4 years, might finally realize where the real problem lies and start asking for real help.

The upshot is that school choice takes AWAY the excuse that it is "the school's fault" because even if the parents never move once during their child's school years they have the opportunity to try that experiment for themselves. In any event, these same hypothetical sub-moron parents of yours would not have pursued help for their miserable offspring WITHOUT the opportunity to move them - so your conclusion is incorrect.

Quite the opposite would occur, I believe. Often times parents move - this is a fact of life. Perhaps to a better home, perhaps not. In any event, if they do not move far Vouchers offer the opportunity to keep their children in the same school - an option NOT available today. My personal opinion is that for every mid-semester move of a child caused by parents simply choosing to move their children to another school mid-term, there would likely be 3-4 students who were enabled to FINISH their term thanks to Vouchers.

Another factor being left out of this discussion is home-schooling. There are many highly competent parents in America who would home-school if they could, but are asked to sacrifice too much to do so (e.g. must pay taxes for schools they do not use and must ALSO forego a career). If we value our children, and likewise value those who provide them with the best possible education, then WHOEVER provides the service of educating children should be compensated - even if it is not at 100% of the rate the typical public school receives for educating a child.

And calling something a straw man argument multiple times doesn't make you right either. But if it makes you feel good to say it...

I do agree with a lot of your points though. Yes this would take away the excuse of "its the schools fault" if they fail. But it was never a good excuse anyway, and I would prefer the child not fail to begin with. There will always be kids who fail, and I never thought schools should be in the business of forcing children to pass, I just wish there was a way to make parents realize that greater responsibility is something they should try sooner, rather than later. And also in regards to that paragraph, you are quite correct that I've noticed a group of students who have never moved, who are terrible students. Some of the worst students fall into this group. Their parents dropped out of this school, their grandparents droped out of the school, education was simply never a priority at all in their family, and they don't care enough about education to even consider whether or not they should be somewhere else.

What I'm more concerned about is parents using the threat of leaving to force bad practice. If the power to leave, is the power to hurt the school they are leaving, administrators might have to make decisions based on what is popular, or what satisfies the parents, and not necessarily what is right for the kids. There's enough pandering that goes on right now, that's really not helpful to the children, and I'd hate to see more of it. I also think too much time is spent trying to get numbers that look good, over spending time to really deal with problems that are in every school. I see too much sweeping of problems under the rug, and trying to deny the real problems in a school. Under a school choice system, I only see that getting worse.

I do like the idea of using a voucher to finish out a school year in the event of a mid semester move. I would support that. Like I said, I believe stability is very important. That would certainly work out well for nearby moves.

I do like homeschooling, but at the same time, I don't think parents who homeschool should get extra benifits or rebates, at least not with our current system. I would not be against a system where parents who had children in the schools pay more for school taxes than those who don't. That's just not the system we have now.

Even without vouchers, I see this happening several times a year, and I'm sure the other teachers on this board would agree with me, that there are always several kids who are either coming from a nearby district, or jsut coming off of homeschooling, or coming from a private school, and the parents think the new district will solve all their problems. I would say nearly half the students I have move into the district after the year has started, are gone again by the time the year is over. I had one girl who was in 5 different districts last year. She was with us for less than 2 months, and was finally starting to get into things when the parents decided the school was rubbish, and moved her on. What I also see a lot of is parents who take their kids out of our school, and into the private school down the street. A good chunk of them are back by the end of the year, and over half are back by the next year.

To bring it back to the original question.. Are vouchers enough? I still say no. A voucher, by itself, without the proper motivation and work ethic, gets you no where. And if you have the motivation and work ethic, you can usually get by fine in whatever district you are in to begin with. Vouchers alone are not going to be the solution to our education problems. To me, they seem to just be a superficial distraction and not worth the time or money.

Apatriot

August 20th, 2009, 3:42 pm

There seems to be the implication of federal involvement in this. Education is a local and personal issue, parental involvement is key.
Education is not a right.

It's not an inalienable or federal right, but in some states it is a right.

PhantomPholly

August 21st, 2009, 9:57 pm

And calling something a straw man argument multiple times doesn't make you right either. But if it makes you feel good to say it...

It isn't name calling and it isn't criticism - it is simply explaining what it is. I'm just trying to help you understand that your argument a) is a hypothetical which only applies to a very few and b) can be demonstrated to be more likely to have exactly the opposite effect that you seem to think it will. You are attacking the concept on the basis of a false argument - which is the very definition of a Straw Man (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man).

I do agree with a lot of your points though. Yes this would take away the excuse of "its the schools fault" if they fail. But it was never a good excuse anyway, and I would prefer the child not fail to begin with.

Fair enough - but that leaves out that a) some children fail today; b) some parents are to ignorant or too deeply in denial to take action, believing that it cannot be the fault of the child or of themselves. None of this changes under a Vouchers system; only the opportunity to seek a different option for your child is in any way different.

There will always be kids who fail, and I never thought schools should be in the business of forcing children to pass, I just wish there was a way to make parents realize that greater responsibility is something they should try sooner, rather than later. And also in regards to that paragraph, you are quite correct that I've noticed a group of students who have never moved, who are terrible students. Some of the worst students fall into this group. Their parents dropped out of this school, their grandparents droped out of the school, education was simply never a priority at all in their family, and they don't care enough about education to even consider whether or not they should be somewhere else.

Yes - those don't need Vouchers, they need a cattle prod twice a day!

:evil:

What I'm more concerned about is parents using the threat of leaving to force bad practice. If the power to leave, is the power to hurt the school they are leaving, administrators might have to make decisions based on what is popular, or what satisfies the parents, and not necessarily what is right for the kids. There's enough pandering that goes on right now, that's really not helpful to the children, and I'd hate to see more of it.

I do agree any change will lead to some new problems. However, once again you describe a situation involving a few parents making a stink and a few schools pandering - while far more parents really are trying to do what is best for their children are more deeply concerned about the possibility of angering their child's teachers if they confront real problems. Lack of choice often means that it is parents who have to placate teachers.

I also think too much time is spent trying to get numbers that look good, over spending time to really deal with problems that are in every school. I see too much sweeping of problems under the rug, and trying to deny the real problems in a school. Under a school choice system, I only see that getting worse.

Hmmm, well all I can say is that a Vouchers system will undoubtedly take money away from poor performing schools over time. As you suggest, by itself it is not a panacea.

To bring it back to the original question.. Are vouchers enough? I still say no. A voucher, by itself, without the proper motivation and work ethic, gets you no where. And if you have the motivation and work ethic, you can usually get by fine in whatever district you are in to begin with. Vouchers alone are not going to be the solution to our education problems. To me, they seem to just be a superficial distraction and not worth the time or money.

Agreed that Vouchers are not enough; however, for what improvements they will bring there does not seem to me to be a valid argument against them. Vouchers neither harm nor help those other aspects of education that are dependent solely upon the initiative of students or their parents.

angelicmadrigal

August 21st, 2009, 10:23 pm

The teachers are the worst part of this problem, because they effectively have control over young minds.

If you believe that do us all a favor and homeschool your damn kids.

pubschteacher

August 22nd, 2009, 1:29 pm

akarra

August 22nd, 2009, 2:11 pm

Not quite that dead (http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/voucher-opponents-losing-pr-battle/), sorry.

PhantomPholly

August 22nd, 2009, 8:54 pm

30 years, 12 voucher initiatives, 0 statewide voucher programs. Last year a voucher initiative was destroyed Utah, lost in every single county in the state. Milwaukee and Cleveland voucher programs, mixed academic results at best. DC program shows minimal gains in reading, but if you take a closer look at sub groups, not so much.

Yes, you are persistently proud of your role in helping to suppress the best chance for real school reform. We've had this discussion before several times.

Why are people still talking about this option?

Because you cannot keep truth in the closet forever, no matter how much your union spends! Which also brings up a pointed question - if you are convinced it is dead, why do you respond to it with such vigor each and every time the subject comes up?

:))

This nag is dead, let her rest in peace.

Obviously not, no matter how many times you chant,

"I WISH it would go away, I WISH it would go away, I WISH it would go away, ..."

As always, I will point out that Voucher programs need not mean the end of the existing public school structure. Most people would not switch right away in any event, and if the public schools are as wonderful as the union supporters would have us believe then no one would ever choose to move their child.

If, however, there are some atrocious schools mismanaged and poorly run, then it is likely that those would suffer the fate of any failing business - and the community will be better for it.

pubschteacher

August 23rd, 2009, 1:20 pm

Not quite that dead (http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/voucher-opponents-losing-pr-battle/), sorry.

Huh?
Your three examples

Arizona's high court bans school vouchers
Mar. 26, 2009 12:00 AM
The Arizona Republic
The Arizona Supreme Court on Wednesday declared the state's school-voucher programs unconstitutional because they violate a ban against appropriating public money for private or religious schools.

Georgia school voucher bill dies in session
Associated Press - March 12, 2009 4:24 PM ET

ATLANTA (AP) - A bill that would have made Georgia the first state in the nation with a universal school voucher program has died after education lobbyists mounted a campaign against the measure.

and a very small program tax credit program in Indiana.

Vouchers lost in every single county in Utah last year, every single one.
The handwriting is on the wall, you just don't see it.

pubschteacher

August 23rd, 2009, 1:28 pm

Yes, you are persistently proud of your role in helping to suppress the best chance for real school reform. We've had this discussion before several times.

Well, in your opinion the best chance for school reform, you and I disagree and always will. I work in a school district that continues to change to better support our students and their parents. You can make public schools work, it just takes an effort by everyone involved.

Because you cannot keep truth in the closet forever, no matter how much your union spends! Which also brings up a pointed question - if you are convinced it is dead, why do you respond to it with such vigor each and every time the subject comes up?

Oh come on, you know why...for the fun of it. :-)

Obviously not, no matter how many times you chant,

"I WISH it would go away, I WISH it would go away, I WISH it would go away, ..."

I don't have to wish it away, everytime the people have a chance to vote on them, they say no. EVERYTIME. I actually think it is your side doing most of the wishing.

As always, I will point out that Voucher programs need not mean the end of the existing public school structure. Most people would not switch right away in any event, and if the public schools are as wonderful as the union supporters would have us believe then no one would ever choose to move their child.

Again, not worried about that at all. If Colorado enacted vouchers today, I would have a teaching job somewhere tomorrow. We fundamentally disagree on what is going the problems in America's schools. You believe it is the schools, I believe it is the work ethic and desire of the American student. Vouchers are not going to make the difference. Just my two cents.

PhantomPholly

August 23rd, 2009, 7:15 pm

Well, in your opinion the best chance for school reform, you and I disagree and always will. I work in a school district that continues to change to better support our students and their parents. You can make public schools work, it just takes an effort by everyone involved.

I think we previously came to an agreement that your school district is exemplary, not representative.

Using statistical modeling, the existence of your school's record of achievement is actually damming to the overall system for the very reason that it DOES stand out. If the current model were a good one, and if a NORMAL DISTRIBUTION of "talented and well-intentioned workers" were what we see across all schools, then your school might still be above average but still close to the norm. I've actually come to agree with you that you are probably a very talented and motivated and well-intentioned teacher - which again begs the question "if the system is so good why does it take exceptional individuals just to get acceptable results?"

Oh come on, you know why...for the fun of it. :-)

Truth... ;)

I don't have to wish it away, everytime the people have a chance to vote on them, they say no. EVERYTIME. I actually think it is your side doing most of the wishing.

That is untrue - in Atlanta parents are up in arms about cutbacks in existing voucher programs, as are parents in D.C.

I think the vast majority of people are simply uneducated, and the actual programs put forth typically so poorly constructed, that the plans simply have a bad reputation. I also think that that is, at least in part, by design of those who oppose Voucher programs - a "poison pill" if you will.

Politics is nothing if not dirty...

Again, not worried about that at all. If Colorado enacted vouchers today, I would have a teaching job somewhere tomorrow. We fundamentally disagree on what is going the problems in America's schools. You believe it is the schools, I believe it is the work ethic and desire of the American student. Vouchers are not going to make the difference. Just my two cents.

Ah, now don't go misrepresenting me! While I think that Vouchers are the quickest and most effective way to start doing WHAT CAN BE DONE to improve schools, I am fully aware that weak schools represent less than half of the problem.

However, they address the portion which can be addressed by government. At least until we each get issued our own personal "political officer," that is...

Edit - in case that wasn't clear, the part government cannot fix is the parents. God help us if they try...

pubschteacher

August 26th, 2009, 11:09 pm

I think we previously came to an agreement that your school district is exemplary, not representative.
Using statistical modeling, the existence of your school's record of achievement is actually damming to the overall system for the very reason that it DOES stand out. If the current model were a good one, and if a NORMAL DISTRIBUTION of "talented and well-intentioned workers" were what we see across all schools, then your school might still be above average but still close to the norm. I've actually come to agree with you that you are probably a very talented and motivated and well-intentioned teacher - which again begs the question "if the system is so good why does it take exceptional individuals just to get acceptable results?"

Well, we are certainly in the top three in Colorado. I believe that the existence of my school districts record is evidence that public schools can and should be able to provide a superior education to students. Teachers in my district are expected to work at a high level and we have worked very hard to maintain rigor at all levels and instill the value of work in our students. Our parent community has embraced this and the results have been very good. All of the stakeholders in this relationship are just normal people who made a decision to make their public schools the very best they could.

That is untrue - in Atlanta parents are up in arms about cutbacks in existing voucher programs, as are parents in D.C.

Actually, I said everytime the people have an opportunity to VOTE they say no. DC and Atlanta were voucher programs that came about as a result of legislative action.

I think the vast majority of people are simply uneducated, and the actual programs put forth typically so poorly constructed, that the plans simply have a bad reputation. I also think that that is, at least in part, by design of those who oppose Voucher programs - a "poison pill" if you will.

Politics is nothing if not dirty...

You and I have been over this before, my assumption is that far more parents approve of THEIR public schools and see vouchers as unnecessary. Let's not go down that road, too much typing last time. :-)

Ah, now don't go misrepresenting me! While I think that Vouchers are the quickest and most effective way to start doing WHAT CAN BE DONE to improve schools, I am fully aware that weak schools represent less than half of the problem.

And I think you know that I am all for reform, I just don't think vouchers are the answer.

However, they address the portion which can be addressed by government. At least until we each get issued our own personal "political officer," that is...

Edit - in case that wasn't clear, the part government cannot fix is the parents. God help us if they try...

see above...community coming together, etc. Sorry, I have essays to grade, have to get to work. Back to school you know. :-)

PhantomPholly

August 27th, 2009, 1:45 pm

Well, we are certainly in the top three in Colorado. I believe that the existence of my school districts record is evidence that public schools can and should be able to provide a superior education to students. Teachers in my district are expected to work at a high level and we have worked very hard to maintain rigor at all levels and instill the value of work in our students. Our parent community has embraced this and the results have been very good. All of the stakeholders in this relationship are just normal people who made a decision to make their public schools the very best they could.

Well, we are arriving at different conclusions based on the same facts. I hear you saying loud and clear that you have EVERYTHING working in your favor (including dedicated support and participation from parents, the most important and least controllable component) in order for your school to be excellent. But life doesn't work that way for the vast majority, it is a statistical aberration.

Actually, I said everytime the people have an opportunity to VOTE they say no. DC and Atlanta were voucher programs that came about as a result of legislative action.

Legislation is a result of elected officials. People voted for them.

:razz:

You and I have been over this before, my assumption is that far more parents approve of THEIR public schools and see vouchers as unnecessary. Let's not go down that road, too much typing last time. :-)

Ok, retort to remain short - any group of 100 people will say that "average" is "above average" given a choice of only one. Again, your statistic is inconclusive at best given nothing to compare to.

And I think you know that I am all for reform, I just don't think vouchers are the answer.

Understood - just like I don't think that Vouchers are the whole answer, just the quickest and easiest way to see improvement.

If the government were serious about getting parents involved, they would run an advertising campaign cajoling parents to get active in the existing and/or new volunteer groups such as PTA, etc.

But government is the problem, not the solution - thus no real solutions should be expected from that quarter without coercion from the voters.

see above...community coming together, etc. Sorry, I have essays to grade, have to get to work. Back to school you know. :-)

Nice to have that guaranteed government job - like a large number of self-employed, I'm back to that entrepreneurial spirit looking for the next opportunity...

:D

pubschteacher

August 27th, 2009, 11:46 pm

Well, we are arriving at different conclusions based on the same facts. I hear you saying loud and clear that you have EVERYTHING working in your favor (including dedicated support and participation from parents, the most important and least controllable component) in order for your school to be excellent. But life doesn't work that way for the vast majority, it is a statistical aberration.

Well, it is hardly just my experience. I have been fortunate enough to belong to a group of about 3000 teachers from all over the country. In the last ten years, we have had hundreds of conversations on this topic and although my sample is very small, it is clear to me that this occurs in many school districts and schools all over the country. I understand that may not be the case for the majority, but it can be done, which is the reform I believe is the best way to go. Our district certainly did not start this way, it took a community effort and community dedication.

Legislation is a result of elected officials. People voted for them.

:razz:

Indirectly, which is fine that is the way the sytem works. The Utah voucher program was a legislative effort, but when put on the ballot, it was crushed. Apparently, Utah's legislature did a poor job of representing their constituents, considering the outcome of the direct vote.

Ok, retort to remain short - any group of 100 people will say that "average" is "above average" given a choice of only one. Again, your statistic is inconclusive at best given nothing to compare to.

I with you on short. PDK/Gallup Poll(pick a year, any year)...Give a grade to the school that your oldest child attends.
A, B, C, D, F
Plenty of choices, most chose A or B, very few chose F.

Understood - just like I don't think that Vouchers are the whole answer, just the quickest and easiest way to see improvement.

Cleveland and Milwaukee, long voucher programs, mixed academic results. Color me skeptical about what improvement we would see.

If the government were serious about getting parents involved, they would run an advertising campaign cajoling parents to get active in the existing and/or new volunteer groups such as PTA, etc.

We did and we went into the community and we listened to what parents wanted and it worked. Simple really.

Nice to have that guaranteed government job - like a large number of self-employed, I'm back to that entrepreneurial spirit looking for the next opportunity...

:D

You did make that choice, just like I did. I knew that I was never going to make a ton of money, so I don't complain about my paycheck. I opted to do what I thought was important work, I knew that as long as people kept having children, I would have a job. This option was available to you as well, you chose to go another way and I am assuming you knew what you were getting into when you made that decision.
It must be nice to know that there is a possibility that the next opportunity might be the one that sets you up financially for life. :-) Not so much in my line of work.

archangelo

August 28th, 2009, 12:10 am

It's not clear how the republic is supposed to survive if there are certain things we don't all know, or even to a degree believe. The reason why we're screaming about education right now isn't because the federal government is involved: it's still involved minimally. It's localities and states that have allowed teacher's unions and education experts and local/state administrators to dominate schools.

The republic did fine for 100 years without compulsory government schooling. But then, the flow of immigrants who were poor and Catholic required a response in order to ensure that the republic would be preserved in the form its rulers preferred. Since then, contrary to popular belief, the system has been overwhelmingly successful in achieving its main purpose.

PhantomPholly

August 29th, 2009, 1:46 pm

Well, it is hardly just my experience. I have been fortunate enough to belong to a group of about 3000 teachers from all over the country. In the last ten years, we have had hundreds of conversations on this topic and although my sample is very small, it is clear to me that this occurs in many school districts and schools all over the country. I understand that may not be the case for the majority, but it can be done, which is the reform I believe is the best way to go. Our district certainly did not start this way, it took a community effort and community dedication.

I agree it CAN be done, it just isn't getting done. Competition would bring about, shall we say "heightened incentive" - and that is exactly what the free market does when not interfered with by governments or monopolies - and schools today suffer from BOTH disincentives.

Indirectly, which is fine that is the way the sytem works. The Utah voucher program was a legislative effort, but when put on the ballot, it was crushed. Apparently, Utah's legislature did a poor job of representing their constituents, considering the outcome of the direct vote.

Keeping in mind that several of those voucher programs were written terribly, I am completely unsurprised. In almost any "election" around 50% of people will vote for the status quo - so it really doesn't take much advertising by the opposers of change to block. That did not stop them from highly organized resistance. So I do not credit those votes as votes against voucher programs - but rather votes against a BAD plan or votes simply FOR the status quo. Selling change is always an uphill battle - but as the schools continue to deteriorate I think it will become an easier argument to make.

I with you on short. PDK/Gallup Poll(pick a year, any year)...Give a grade to the school that your oldest child attends.
A, B, C, D, F
Plenty of choices, most chose A or B, very few chose F.

Ever read Yahoo! movie reviews? Same result, often even for garbage. By nature, people typically inflate their ratings.

Cleveland and Milwaukee, long voucher programs, mixed academic results. Color me skeptical about what improvement we would see.

I seem to remember reading something about that - the public schools showed improvement during that same observation period. That would seem to me that the program had it's intended effect; that fear of job losses motivated those in the public schools to get their act together. Remember, I'm not hard-over about CLOSING public schools, just creating some valid competition.

We did and we went into the community and we listened to what parents wanted and it worked. Simple really.

I believe you. You, and many others, are smart and dedicated to making the system work. I'll point out that if YOU worked for a non-public school odds are you would work just as hard to make THAT system work. But, problem is that you are at the far upper end of the bell curve of human behavior.

You did make that choice, just like I did. I knew that I was never going to make a ton of money, so I don't complain about my paycheck. I opted to do what I thought was important work, I knew that as long as people kept having children, I would have a job. This option was available to you as well, you chose to go another way and I am assuming you knew what you were getting into when you made that decision.
It must be nice to know that there is a possibility that the next opportunity might be the one that sets you up financially for life. :-) Not so much in my line of work.

Hehe - did I say I was unhappy about it? Just about the economy. No, in my line of work no one contract will "set me up for life." Well, it could if I were a better salesperson - but I sell my own skills not the skills of others. Maybe one day.

pubschteacher

August 29th, 2009, 5:42 pm

I agree it CAN be done, it just isn't getting done. Competition would bring about, shall we say "heightened incentive" - and that is exactly what the free market does when not interfered with by governments or monopolies - and schools today suffer from BOTH disincentives.

I wonder, do you go to work everyday intending to do a poor job? Is your only motivation to do a good job because of money or out of fear that you will lose your job? You strike me as the type of person who does their job well because you take pride in your work. You can pay me more and even threaten my job, I will continue to work at the same level I am working now. It is about a job well done to me. Would you work harder if you were paid more? I doubt it. Vouchers are going to solve the problems of parent and student apathy.

Keeping in mind that several of those voucher programs were written terribly, I am completely unsurprised. In almost any "election" around 50% of people will vote for the status quo - so it really doesn't take much advertising by the opposers of change to block. That did not stop them from highly organized resistance. So I do not credit those votes as votes against voucher programs - but rather votes against a BAD plan or votes simply FOR the status quo. Selling change is always an uphill battle - but as the schools continue to deteriorate I think it will become an easier argument to make.

Well, we have had this argument before and again, I can only speak for Colorado, but having spent a great deal of time making sure vouchers failed in Colorado, I can safely say that the pro voucher side would have voted for ANY voucher program. I wouldn't hold your breath about it getting any easier, it has been 30 years and the numbers voting no on these initiatives have gotten larger.

Ever read Yahoo! movie reviews? Same result, often even for garbage. By nature, people typically inflate their ratings.

So, how do you propose we measure opinion on this issue. I give you election results and you use poor writing as an excuse, I give you 25 years of national polls on this issue and you use inflated ratings on movie reviews. I hardly think that a parent, given an opportunity, to be polled on the effectiveness of their school is going to treat it like their review of a movie.

I seem to remember reading something about that - the public schools showed improvement during that same observation period. That would seem to me that the program had it's intended effect; that fear of job losses motivated those in the public schools to get their act together. Remember, I'm not hard-over about CLOSING public schools, just creating some valid competition.

http://www.weac.org/news_and_publications/education_news/2007-2008/voucherreport.aspx

It is not as clear as you think.

I believe you. You, and many others, are smart and dedicated to making the system work. I'll point out that if YOU worked for a non-public school odds are you would work just as hard to make THAT system work. But, problem is that you are at the far upper end of the bell curve of human behavior.

Well, thanks, but it has been my experience with the hundreds and hundreds of teachers that I have met over the last 28 years that I am average on that bell curve.

Hehe - did I say I was unhappy about it? Just about the economy. No, in my line of work no one contract will "set me up for life." Well, it could if I were a better salesperson - but I sell my own skills not the skills of others. Maybe one day.

No, I always assumed you liked your work, just like I do. One of the perks of my job is a very high level of security, one of the perks is your job is the potential for greater financial reward. Just the way it is.

PhantomPholly

August 30th, 2009, 7:51 pm

I wonder, do you go to work everyday intending to do a poor job? Is your only motivation to do a good job because of money or out of fear that you will lose your job? You strike me as the type of person who does their job well because you take pride in your work. You can pay me more and even threaten my job, I will continue to work at the same level I am working now. It is about a job well done to me. Would you work harder if you were paid more? I doubt it. Vouchers are going to solve the problems of parent and student apathy.

Not once - I quit before I fail to perform. However, I will also seek out the highest paying opportunity (and conversely leave a position which is not compensating me according to the value I am providing). The same scenario works in reverse for employers - if it means losing business, they will reduce the decision making time to eliminate non-performers.

Competition could weed out individual teachers who do not perform well quicker, because "once the word gets out" parents won't enroll their kids with that teacher. Without the option to pull their child out of the school (and the accompanying dollars), parents do not have the option to say, "put my child with another teacher or I'm taking them (and the money) to another school.

It is all about reducing the feedback cycle or, in some cases, forcing out the bad eggs even if they have the "protection" of some elected school board member, etc.

Well, we have had this argument before and again, I can only speak for Colorado, but having spent a great deal of time making sure vouchers failed in Colorado, I can safely say that the pro voucher side would have voted for ANY voucher program. I wouldn't hold your breath about it getting any easier, it has been 30 years and the numbers voting no on these initiatives have gotten larger.

Yep, some are just angry and would vote for any alternative. Some are stubborn and would not vote for an alternative even if it was platinum-coated. Slowly, though, we are seeing a few sensible programs succeed - and just like new consumer products, over time the doubters will come to appreciate the alternative.

So, how do you propose we measure opinion on this issue.

There is really only one fair way to do so - measure performance and opinion BEFORE and again AFTER a prudent voucher program in small to medium size pilot programs. If afterwards you see that people have about the same level of satisfaction but both public and alternatives show improvement, then the program has worked (introduction of competition resulted in reactionary improvement in existing schools in order to stop loss of students / funds). Really about the only ways it would be a "failure" is if performance overall drops or all parents & students are less satisfied.

I give you election results and you use poor writing as an excuse, I give you 25 years of national polls on this issue and you use inflated ratings on movie reviews. I hardly think that a parent, given an opportunity, to be polled on the effectiveness of their school is going to treat it like their review of a movie.

The alternative you offer is to "prove it will be better" while denying the opportunity for a valid test. That is sucker's bet. The DC program was and is successful (although they are ending it). The Georgia program is working. These successes are the ones we should be focusing on as a model for future programs.

It all comes down to managing risk while not stifling innovation. That requires a never ending cycle of Champion / Challenger experiments. That is the proven model for process improvement (my specialty). If the Challenger experiment does not work, can it. If it does work, begin integrating it slowly across larger regions.

http://www.weac.org/news_and_publications/education_news/2007-2008/voucherreport.aspx

It is not as clear as you think.

Other variables apart from voucher availability, such as staying in the same school from year to year, have more consistent (although small) positive impact on student performance, especially in regard to language arts test score gains.

So, the ability to move your family while allowing your children to stay in the same school is a positive.

At the same time, there were NO negative outcomes reported. So, why the resistance to providing parents with an alternative?

No, I always assumed you liked your work, just like I do. One of the perks of my job is a very high level of security, one of the perks is your job is the potential for greater financial reward. Just the way it is.

Well, it is true I like what I do but would certainly stop if I win the lottery.

Anyway, all things being equal I am in favor of Vouchers even if the results are the same, for the simple reason that it takes the decision away from government and gives it to parents. Above and beyond the flexibility it gives parents to leave their children in the same school, this is a fundamental precept of liberty.