Yes. I generally support any voucher program.
Yes, but only if the funds come from private programs, not government.
Yes, but only if the students are smart enough.
Yes, if the conditions under options 2 AND 3 are met.
No. I generally do not support any voucher program.
I favor vouchers if, and only if, those vouchers come with strings attached. Government money should not be going to any program, public or private, which does not meet educational standards and require testing to make sure students are actually learning at required levels. If you do that, I've got no problem with it. However, most private schools would refuse to take government vouchers if they had to actually prove they were doing a good job, were actually required to teach actual science, actual history, etc. The reason most of these private schools exist in the first place is they don't want to have to provide an actual well-rounded, fact-based education.
Until they're willing to, I say no to vouchers.
Actually, I'd rather take the decision-making process out of the hands of the politicians entirely because the politicians are no more educationally-saavy than most parents. I'd rather see a completely apolitical group made up of professional scientists and educators making the decisions of what the curriculum ought to include and then have a pool of people who work in that field actually decide the specifics of what ought to be learned at what level. Of course, this is only going to apply to the sciences, which are in a horrible state in the United States today, but a similar system could be put in place for softer subjects as well.Tell me, what specific structural changes would there be to make sure that these decisions are being made by unbiased apolitical experts? Let's say Mike Huckabee gets elected President with a big Republican majority and decides to stack this team full of people that don't believe in evolution and think that anywhere that teaches any form of evolution (including bacterial and cellular evolution) isn't fit to teach students, what then?
Yes it is and in some places, it's necessary. The ignorant and uneducated are inherently incapable of making decisions on education. We no longer live in a world where the majority of people can get an 8th grade education and still find work and be a functional part of an increasingly technological society. When you have a lot of parents who didn't need to know anything about them durn computers and neither do their kids... that's a problem. In order to shift from a largely rural non-technical society to a highly-technical society, kids need to learn not only how to function, but how to think rationally and critically about the world around them.Taking it out of the hands of the people (which is what you're talking about, saying parents can't decide and their elected officials can't decide) is authoritarianism.
Where in the Constitution does it mention automobile licenses? Like it or not, the Constitution is not the end-all-be-all of reality. It was meant to be a growing, evolving document but some people are so in love with the words that they can't move beyond them to the concepts.Where in the Constitution do you suggest the government is given the authority to create a board of philosopher kings with no democratic oversight whatsoever with the authority to dictate a large proportion of how children are raised and to do so with taxpayer money (which they presumably would have to have unlimited access to, to prevent the politicization of the appropriations process)?
Kids in crappy schools should be given the option to obtain vouchers to go to schools which don't suck so much.
This is not all about education, either. Some schools are downright dangerous places, where survival is a priority above education. Kids should not have to belong to such an environment if their parents do not wish it.
I've heard schools need to be fixed all my short life and to date no one has done anything responsible in "fixing" these schools.
I was discovering that life just simply isn't fair and bask in the unsung glory of knowing that each obstacle overcome along the way only adds to the satisfaction in the end. Nothing great, after all, was ever accomplished by anyone sulking in his or her misery.
Yes, I'll agree with you, but again, what made the schools dangerous in the first place? They don't get that way on their own.This is not all about education, either. Some schools are downright dangerous places, where survival is a priority above education. Kids should not have to belong to such an environment if their parents do not wish it.