Do you support school choice?

I went to the School Choice Ohio website and they were featuring this video.
School Choice Ohio has funding to help meet the needs of the disabled. Enjoy

vesper said:

Yes whether we have children or not, it is the duty of all to pay taxes to provide an education for the children because we as a society are the beneficiaries. However, after paying those taxes and your child is not receiving an adequate education, what is a parent's recourse? After the State takes your tax dollars, if it can not provide for your child a school where he/she can grow and thrive, then they owe it to the child to provide one that will. Here in Ohio we have 5 state funded scholarship programs that help families who are eligible to send their children to a participating private or public school of their choice. There are all types of schools enrolled in the program to best meet each student's needs. Whether the problem for your child be a safety issue, a learning disability, or poor performing public school, the parent has school choice in Ohio.

Click to expand...

My cousin went to a charter school. He told me that for the first time in his life he didn't mind going to school. Got good grades to. They must be doing something right.

mac said:

At the very least, the great majority of states do. Those that don't, if any, would be rare exceptions.

Click to expand...

Proof please.

YES

I transferred out of a violent school that epitomized futility. If it were up to me, all such schools would be shut down. As it stands, people should have the choice to leave unsafe and useless "learning" environments so they aren't driven to drop out or attempt suicide. For similar reasons, i'm a big proponent of dual enrollment and home schooling when K-12 just doesn't cut it.

mac said:

My argument was based on suburban schools. With the exception of "elite" private schools, most private schools operate at 75% of the cost public schools pay per student. In my predominantly white, middle to upper class, county, the average tuition is $8000 while the average public school expense per student is $13,000.

Click to expand...

That's because they can choose how many special needs children they want to accept. Special education costs can be highly expensive. If they were mandated to accept all special needs children, AND they were required by IDEA to apply that law, you would see those costs rise too. Picking what they want to take on is rather unfair.

vesper said:

That sounds really honorable but the "hard truth" is autistic kids most often have reinforcement at home. It takes teachers/parents and students who are willing to work together. I have several friends who are teachers. What I am getting from them is the lack of parental involvement in their student's life. They tell me they send out parent teacher conferences only to sit there all evening and have but a couple of parents show up for their meeting. Then they call the no shows personally and ask for another chance to speak with them about their child's progress and relay issues that the parents need to address with their children and it goes nowhere. Often the only time they hear from these parents is after the problem has gotten out of control and the child either ends up in detention or suspended. Then the parents manage to drag their arses into the school to bitch about the kid getting suspended. Your way of providing all these special services because the kids have jerks for parents, many are already in place and leaving those who actually still pay taxes a heavier burden to carry to pay for them. There is no way to rescue every child but those that you can by offering them another choice in school that they attend, should be paramount.

Click to expand...

I don't disagree that parents, neighborhood and culture are among the reasons why children fail in school. That is a reality that schools need to address with work on the kids behavior, longer school days, longer school years, more and better pre-school access and other measures. It costs the same to send somneone to Harvard as it cost to keep them in prison. The USA imprisons a larger portion of its population than any other nation in the history of the world. We can educate virtually every child effectively if we change our priorities from dealing with the results of failed education to preventing educational failure.

Hard Truth said:

I don't disagree that parents, neighborhood and culture are among the reasons why children fail in school. That is a reality that schools need to address with work on the kids behavior, longer school days, longer school years, more and better pre-school access and other measures. It costs the same to send somneone to Harvard as it cost to keep them in prison. The USA imprisons a larger portion of its population than any other nation in the history of the world. We can educate virtually every child effectively if we change our priorities from dealing with the results of failed education to preventing educational failure.

Click to expand...

while i appreciate that you have seized on THE major barrier to a good education for all students, that so many tend to reside in unsupportive environments, i do not see that you have addressed the problem
longer school days, longer school year, better pre-school speak to the symptoms and not the underlying problem. those ill disciplined kids return to their unsupportive homes every night and weekend. and then return to the school room as undisciplined as when they left the previous school day

vesper said:

...However, after paying those taxes and your child is not receiving an adequate education, what is a parent's recourse? ....

Click to expand...

Attend and participate in school board and PTA meetings, work with the teacher, complain to the principal, run for the school board and/or supporting board candidates are all options for a reasonably prosperous parent, all of which are virtually impossible for many parents amongst the working poor. Ironically, the people with the most ability to improve school quality, yet don't use those opportunities, are often the ones most inclined to destroy for the of public education with voucher and privatization schemes for their own family's assumed/perceived benefit.

justabubba said:

while i appreciate that you have seized on THE major barrier to a good education for all students, that so many tend to reside in unsupportive environments, i do not see that you have addressed the problem
longer school days, longer school year, better pre-school speak to the symptoms and not the underlying problem. those ill disciplined kids return to their unsupportive homes every night and weekend. and then return to the school room as undisciplined as when they left the previous school day

Click to expand...

I think that's when the importance of having specific resources available to meet the needs of these children rather than throwing them in the back of a classroom to act out and call it "inclusion" needs to be changed. If you have a child crying out for help (in many severe cases it is a mental health issue) don't leave a classroom teacher there alone with 30 other students to deal with it and then add the extra pressure of they all must pass a test so no time off learning. It us unrealistic. Have a paid mental health or behavioral specialist on staff to deal with children who need the help. Schools need to stop pretending it is not a real problem and that a classroom teacher is a super hero that can deal with all significant problems because it's the cheaper alternative.

justabubba said:

while i appreciate that you have seized on THE major barrier to a good education for all students, that so many tend to reside in unsupportive environments, i do not see that you have addressed the problem
longer school days, longer school year, better pre-school speak to the symptoms and not the underlying problem. those ill disciplined kids return to their unsupportive homes every night and weekend. and then return to the school room as undisciplined as when they left the previous school day

Click to expand...

The measures I mentioned, and others, can address the underlying problems to a large degree. Those people who manage to overcome their poverty without the benefit of good parents nearly always do so with the aid of a mentor who gives them hope, encouragement and a good role model. The schools should be able to provide these mentors and the attention to behavioral, nutritional, pyschological and other issues that is needed. This has been done successfully in some schools. It can be done everywhere it is needed in public schools with sufficient commitment, oversight and enough funding. Again, we need to change our priorities from dealing with the results of failed education to preventing educational failure. Privatization and voucher schemes will not make that happen, instead those schemes will increase the difference in quality between rich and poor schools.

Privatization and voucher schemes are based on the notion that it impossible to effectively educate most poor and other challenging children, and that it is acceptable to give up on the effort. The problem of educational failure will never be solved with that attitude and such practices.

MoSurveyor said:

Really?

NCSPE: National Center for the Study of Privatization in Education, Teachers College, Columbia University
NCSPE: Funding

NCSPE: Advisory Board
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Newman_(educator)


NCSPE: Team





I suspect you don't like it's message, which makes you blind and/or prejudice - but you're more than welcome to attempt to prove your unfounded claim.

Click to expand...

Since I made no evaluation of its message since I know next to nothing about the organization, its pretty hard to be either blind or prejudiced about it. I do know something about the NEA, however--I have experienced that first hand, up close, and personal--and therefore my suspicion that an organization they would partner with is likely their own extension is not unwarranted or unfounded. Upon a bit of further research I can accept that that NCSPE is not affiliated with the NEA but published a paper favorable to the point of view promoted by the NEA. I don't know enough about the NCSPE to know if they actually do have a sociopolitical agenda and what, if they do, that might be.

I do know that the paper/study cited simply doesn't jive with the research I've seen from others. If that makes me blind and prejudiced, so be it.

AlbqOwl said:

Since I made no evaluation of its message since I know next to nothing about the organization, its pretty hard to be either blind or prejudiced about it. I do know something about the NEA, however--I have experienced that first hand, up close, and personal--and therefore my suspicion that an organization they would partner with is likely their own extension is not unwarranted or unfounded. Upon a bit of further research I can accept that that NCSPE is not affiliated with the NEA but published a paper favorable to the point of view promoted by the NEA. I don't know enough about the NCSPE to know if they actually do have a sociopolitical agenda and what, if they do, that might be.

I do know that the paper/study cited simply doesn't jive with the research I've seen from others. If that makes me blind and prejudiced, so be it.

Click to expand...

You never cited any 'research'. I'm still waiting.

rabbitcaebannog said:

You never cited any 'research'. I'm still waiting.

Click to expand...

But I did post a case history of an actual voucher system in operation that doesn't fit with the study you cited. And I mentioned our own experience with charter schools, all voluntary, in our own school system here which is one of the largest districts in the country. I haven't posted links to studies I've read because I simply don't care enough to go hunt them up again if they are even on the internet. I concede that the study you linked strongly criticizes school choice. Again my own experience and what I have read doesn't support the opinion of the author or authors of that study. But then, just because somebody publishes something is not particularly convincing to me. And I have my reasons for that point of view too.

AlbqOwl said:

But I did post a case history of an actual voucher system in operation that doesn't fit with the study you cited. And I mentioned our own experience with charter schools, all voluntary, in our own school system here which is one of the largest districts in the country. I haven't posted links to studies I've read because I simply don't care enough to go hunt them up again if they are even on the internet. I concede that the study you linked strongly criticizes school choice. Again my own experience and what I have read doesn't support the opinion of the author or authors of that study. But then, just because somebody publishes something is not particularly convincing to me. And I have my reasons for that point of view too.

Click to expand...

AlbqOwl, I've no problem with the fact that they raised the additional funds rather than raid funds from other students that attend public schools. In fact, I applaud it. Unfortunately, the problem is that is not the norm. That is a problem. I've no problem speaking out against it because it's depleting funds from the schools that need it the most. That is just one of the reasons classroom teachers are left with fewer and fewer resources to help the most needy students. Also, are you speaking about a district or school? I see school but perhaps, you could show me more.

rabbitcaebannog said:

That's because they can choose how many special needs children they want to accept. Special education costs can be highly expensive. If they were mandated to accept all special needs children, AND they were required by IDEA to apply that law, you would see those costs rise too. Picking what they want to take on is rather unfair.

Click to expand...

There is no reason to believe that there would not arise schools tailored to their specific needs and therefore more efficient.

mac said:

There is no reason to believe that there would not arise schools tailored to their specific needs and therefore more efficient.

Click to expand...

but many of the parents of those special needs kids do not want them in enclaves with other special needs kids
they want them with 'regular' students in 'regular' schools, to 'mainstream' them
why would a FOR PROFIT school allow students who are much more expensive to educate, attend at the same voucher value as a student who did not need extraordinary and expensive resources, if they are allowed to exclude such special needs/high cost students [as is the circumstance today]

mac said:

There is no reason to believe that there would not arise schools tailored to their specific needs and therefore more efficient.

Click to expand...

Really? The motive behind any school that has to make a profit is profit. That is why I think these schools choose the number of students they take in with expensive issues and get rid of those that they know need more.

justabubba said:

but many of the parents of those special needs kids do not want them in enclaves with other special needs kids
they want them with 'regular' students in 'regular' schools, to 'mainstream' them
why would a FOR PROFIT school allow students who are much more expensive to educate, attend at the same voucher value as a student who did not need extraordinary and expensive resources, if they are allowed to exclude such special needs/high cost students [as is the circumstance today]

Click to expand...

Exactly! Why would they take on the extra costs when they can simply exclude them.

rabbitcaebannog said:

AlbqOwl, I've no problem with the fact that they raised the additional funds rather than raid funds from other students that attend public schools. In fact, I applaud it. Unfortunately, the problem is that is not the norm. That is a problem. I've no problem speaking out against it because it's depleting funds from the schools that need it the most. That is just one of the reasons classroom teachers are left with fewer and fewer resources to help the most needy students. Also, are you speaking about a district or school? I see school but perhaps, you could show me more.

Click to expand...

And I have no problem with debating the issue. I have a HUGE problem when dishonest tactics are used to sell something though, no matter what it is. And the NEA has been exceedingly dishonest in their own self-serving intent to prevent any form of privatizing the schools or reducing federal powers over those schools. The NEA's goal is to protect all their dues paying teachers whether or not they actually teach kids.

My goal, as is all others who promote school choice, is to educate children. All you have to do is look at the track record of the schools receiving maximum government funding to see that funding is not the problem. Some of those are the most poorly performing.

And when you look at the impressive record of the home schooled, parochial schooled, private schooled, and charter schooled kids, even with the poorest and most disadvantaged kids, compared to the average public school, any thinking person has to admit that many if not most public schools just aren't getting the job done as well as it can be done.

I am old enough to remember when it was the local community that funded the schools and the state and federal government had little or nothing to do with them. And raising funds for projects not covered by school taxes was the norm, not something unusual. Not something that should be discouraged. But if you read the story I posted you will see that the costs of providing a better education with the voucher program was about half that when the government dictates it all. You got caught up with the idea that they fell a bit short and had to raise some money to cover expenses. And you missed the success story that was there to see.

AlbqOwl said:

And I have no problem with debating the issue. I have a HUGE problem when dishonest tactics are used to sell something though, no matter what it is. And the NEA has been exceedingly dishonest in their own self-serving intent to prevent any form of privatizing the schools or reducing federal powers over those schools. The NEA's goal is to protect all their dues paying teachers whether or not they actually teach kids.

My goal, as is all others who promote school choice, is to educate children. All you have to do is look at the track record of the schools receiving maximum government funding to see that funding is not the problem. Some of those are the most poorly performing.

And when you look at the impressive record of the home schooled, parochial schooled, private schooled, and charter schooled kids, even with the poorest and most disadvantaged kids, compared to the average public school, any thinking person has to admit that many if not most public schools just aren't getting the job done as well as it can be done.

I am old enough to remember when it was the local community that funded the schools and the state and federal government had little or nothing to do with them. And raising funds for projects not covered by school taxes was the norm, not something unusual. Not something that should be discouraged. But if you read the story I posted you will see that the costs of providing a better education with the voucher program was about half that when the government dictates it all. You got caught up with the idea that they fell a bit short and had to raise some money to cover expenses. And you missed the success story that was there to see.

Click to expand...

The research was not done by the NEA. Feel free to look at the research and tell me where you disagree instead of hiding behind Ad Hominem. You are not listening to where private schools/charters etc.... have a quota which they can say 'enough'. We have a budget so we can only take on so many expensive children. Public schools CANNOT keep those children from entering their doors no matter how expensive they may costs. How these private/charter schools run is mainly by depleting funds from public schools not from raising costs through other means. Any school can have a success story if they are properly funded and staffed.

AlbqOwl said:

And I have no problem with debating the issue. I have a HUGE problem when dishonest tactics are used to sell something though, no matter what it is. And the NEA has been exceedingly dishonest in their own self-serving intent to prevent any form of privatizing the schools or reducing federal powers over those schools. The NEA's goal is to protect all their dues paying teachers whether or not they actually teach kids.

Click to expand...

please share with us those positions the NEA has taken which are intended to protect their dues paying member teachers

My goal, as is all others who promote school choice, is to educate children. All you have to do is look at the track record of the schools receiving maximum government funding to see that funding is not the problem. Some of those are the most poorly performing.

Click to expand...

but are those well funded schools spending their money educating kids or doing other things
money is certainly an issue for schools which do not have adequate resources
money tends not to be a problem for schools in affluent communities
those weak urban and rural schools tend to have inadequate funding
and that tends to be where the weak schools are located

And when you look at the impressive record of the home schooled, parochial schooled, private schooled, and charter schooled kids, even with the poorest and most disadvantaged kids, compared to the average public school, any thinking person has to admit that many if not most public schools just aren't getting the job done as well as it can be done.

Click to expand...

this is so wrong. jesuit operated schools tend to have the best results. Christian schools tend to have the worst (especially those operated by the southern baptist church). some charter schools are excellent. they frequently have cherry picked from among the available students in their community. home schooled kids are all over the place. some do well, others are weak. they tend to have difficulty adjusting to a college environment once they leave home. but once adjusted for having to teach all students, including the trouble makers and those with special needs, the average public school performs at least as well as its average alterative counterparts

I am old enough to remember when it was the local community that funded the schools and the state and federal government had little or nothing to do with them. And raising funds for projects not covered by school taxes was the norm, not something unusual. Not something that should be discouraged. But if you read the story I posted you will see that the costs of providing a better education with the voucher program was about half that when the government dictates it all. You got caught up with the idea that they fell a bit short and had to raise some money to cover expenses. And you missed the success story that was there to see.

Click to expand...

and i am old enough to remember when schools were segregated. when black schools received the old books and supplies left over when the white schools got new teaching materials
and in my berg, where the schools were stupidly found to be unitary by my (now dead) reich wing neighbor, the federal judge, the schools have returned to being segregated. we have white schools and minority schools ... even tho the minority students now outnumber the white students. and when those high performing white schools need something, the affluent PTA members make sure it is made available. and when the low performing minority schools need something ... well, there is no PTA activity and no affluence to be able to buy those needed 'extras' the school system seems unable to provide. my wife teaches at a school where 98% of the students qualify for subsidized meals. while all the students receive a laptop thanks to bill & melinda gates foundation funding, when they go home, many of the kids have no access to the internet. there remains a digital divide between the haves and the have nots. if you are in a competitive environment and your peers can do their homework assignment on an internet accessed computer while must do yours with a pen and paper, whose work is likely to receive a better grade. the students suffer educationally because they come from poor environments. some who recently went on a field trip to a lake twenty minutes away, wondered if they were looking at the ocean. they have not been to a museum. they have no art supplies at home. they have no books in their home. no one reads to them. there is very little exposure to the culture that the more affluent and middle class students enjoy. their baseline of knowledge, from which they start is very much lower, than their more affluent peers. and yet we expect them to perform at the same educational level and then wonder why they do not? i do not see the success stories you insist exist ... at least not for the poor kids

maquiscat said:

Actually you have to pay for every school. The money goes into a big pool on the various levels and then gets spread out. So a district that has more people in it than it's neighbor might not get more money, nor will one school with more students necessarily get more money (in comparable economic areas).

Click to expand...

I'm well aware of funding sources for my district and how our state divides the funds it sends to schools. My school taxes support my school district and my district alone. The basic formula for state funds includes the number of students per day attending, so the district with more students will get more state money in comparable economic areas. If your school funding is different then you have a very strange method of taxation and funding where you live.

mac said:

At the very least, the great majority of states do. Those that don't, if any, would be rare exceptions.

Click to expand...

Home Schooling Topics and Resources
These resources are provided as a convenience and a service for those seeking information about home schooling. References to agencies or organizations outside the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education DO NOT constitute our endorsement.


Accreditation
The Missouri State Board of Education and the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education do not have authority to regulate private or home schools. There is no program for the inspection, approval, or accreditation of home schools in Missouri.


Curriculum/Textbooks
Missouri does not have a statewide-adopted school curriculum nor is there a state-approved textbook listing. The selection of instructional materials is the responsibility of parents who home school their children. Missouri public, private, and home schooled students have the option to take online courses through the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education's Virtual Instruction Program (MoVIP).


Diplomas
There is no state recognized high school diploma for home schooled students. Home schooled students may take the high school equivalency examination to obtain a high school equivalency certificate.

Click to expand...

Home Schooling Topics and Resources

mac said:

My argument was based on suburban schools. With the exception of "elite" private schools, most private schools operate at 75% of the cost public schools pay per student. In my predominantly white, middle to upper class, county, the average tuition is $8000 while the average public school expense per student is $13,000.

Click to expand...

You keep interchanging tuition and operating cost but they're not usually synonymous in private schools. For example, it's a well known fact that Catholic schools are highly subsidized by the Church, so comparing Catholic school tuition to public school cost, instead of comparing Catholic school cost to public school cost, isn't a valid comparison. You really need to make sure the Catholic church is willing to subsidize millions and millions of non-Catholic children before you use their tuition rates as "cost". The same applies to virtually all private schools in America. I think you'll find most of them are supported through other means than just tuition, so to use private school tuition statistics you would need the consent of all contributors and philanthropists that donate to private schools. Good luck getting that because I'd bet they're not willing.


I would also note your private school "tuition" most likely does not include transportation costs.

MoSurveyor said:

You keep interchanging tuition and operating cost but they're not usually synonymous in private schools. For example, it's a well known fact that Catholic schools are highly subsidized by the Church, so comparing Catholic school tuition to public school cost, instead of comparing Catholic school cost to public school cost, isn't a valid comparison. You really need to make sure the Catholic church is willing to subsidize millions and millions of non-Catholic children before you use their tuition rates as "cost". The same applies to virtually all private schools in America. I think you'll find most of them are supported through other means than just tuition, so to use private school tuition statistics you would need the consent of all contributors and philanthropists that donate to private schools. Good luck getting that because I'd bet they're not willing.


I would also note your private school "tuition" most likely does not include transportation costs.

Click to expand...

Revenue (tuition) and production costs are actually never equal or maybe I should say only in rare cases.