• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Do you support a voucher system for school choice?

Do you support school choice?

  • yes

    Votes: 20 57.1%

  • yes, as long as it does not go to religious schools

    Votes: 3 8.6%

  • no, private education is bad

    Votes: 10 28.6%

  • taxation is theft

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • not sure

    Votes: 2 5.7%
  • Total voters
    35
chuckiechan said:
Our schools in Roseville are top notch. It a new, growing, middle and upper middle class area area. The schools are great. They are so great, out parish has decided not to open a second Roseville school since the one we have near Roseville is struggling because it’s hard to compete with good well run public schools.
Click to expand...

There are a lot of Rosevilles. Which one are you in?

Do you have a link to the academic outcomes between your local private Schools and your Local public schools?

That said, if the burdens of paying for the tuition in the local private schools were relieved, do you think that might impact the head counts?
 
washunut said:
The last paragraph is an interesting take, one I had not thought of. You are right of course, if you take government money it comes with or will come with strings attached.

I think that the poll is flawed in a significant way. The no, comes with private education is bad. I would have voted no for a much different reason.

My son went to a private high school. The school has great academics, as well as activities. Beautiful campus. Teachers who are motivated and come from schools such as Yale. The year he graduated 20% of the graduating class scored 800 on the math portion of the SAT. The issue is that the school cost about $30K per year a dozen years ago. Don't know what it costs now. That being said a voucher of $10K would mean little about affordability for lower income students. Vouchers may do what student loans did. Raise the cost the school charges. Not helping parents.
Click to expand...

Taking government money is an interesting notion in this and all things.

The money is NOT government money. The money belongs to the parents of the students.

Vouchers would stop the transfer of money to the government in the first place. The money would be spent by the parents on buying the best education they could find.

Not much different than buying any other necessity to benefit their children.
 
code1211 said:
Taking government money is an interesting notion in this and all things.

The money is NOT government money. The money belongs to the parents of the students.

Vouchers would stop the transfer of money to the government in the first place. The money would be spent by the parents on buying the best education they could find.

Not much different than buying any other necessity to benefit their children.
Click to expand...

Most of the money used to pay for public schools come from property taxes. Those taxes are paid by all homeowners,including those with zero children in school.
 
Helix said:
there was no poll option that represents my view. i no longer support the voucher thing. i live in the state where it really took off, and it has mostly been used as a weapon against public schools.
Click to expand...

In what way is a expanding choice a weapon?

If there is only a mandated limited variety of choices, you end up with what is is beneficial to those who provide the limited choices.

When there is a wide selection of choices, you end up with what is beneficial to the shoppers.

Expanded choice is what has moved Amazon near the top of retailers in the world with no stores to walk inside of.

New approaches are not always bad ideas.
 
Nap said:
Japan has a decent system, you basically have to apply to the high schools and your test scores largely determine where you go. So basically all the crappy schools get the worst students and troublemakers while the good schools bring in the students that are looking to excell.
Click to expand...

Will academic performance be considered in the ongoing assignment of the students to succeeding schools?

Can a student in a bad school perform his way into a good school?
 
Surrealistik said:
I'm thinking more along the lines of Finland which aims for (and achieves) superb and world-leading overall excellence in public education and minimal differences between their best and worst students as opposed to stratifying systems with a selection bias like Japan or countries with substantial private/public divisions.


Speaking more generally, as has been noted before, one of the single biggest flaws with voucher systems is the fact that they are very likely to divert resources from public education which in turn is almost certain to perpetuate any existing performance imbalance between public and private education.
Click to expand...

Why is diverting resources from a detested system to a preferred system a bad thing?
 
I would be far more supportive of a voucher program and actually chose my daughters school and put it back towards the public school that she loves so much rather than the fly by night for profit schools tbat pop up in voucher states.
 
Surrealistik said:
I'm thinking more along the lines of Finland which aims for (and achieves) superb and world-leading overall excellence in public education and minimal differences between their best and worst students as opposed to stratifying systems with a selection bias like Japan or countries with substantial private/public divisions.


Speaking more generally, as has been noted before, one of the single biggest flaws with voucher systems is the fact that they are very likely to divert resources from public education which in turn is almost certain to perpetuate any existing performance imbalance between public and private education.
Click to expand...

If the Finnish System is producing very good results, why have the systems/procedures used there not been adopted by their American Counterparts?

It seems like we should be examining success and spreading the Best Practices.

What is it that our educators are trying to achieve?
 
I would love to see someone open a chain of pagan and Muslim based private schools in voucher states and see just how supportive the pro voucher folks will respond to their tax dollars going to them.
 
Waddy said:
We have the best university system in the world. It's a magnet for foreign students wanting an excellent degree program. And it's effectively a voucher system. The PELL grant and/or student loans aren't restricted to public schools alone; you can take that money to virtually any qualified school. The K-12 system needs to operate like the university system does.

And I don't see why any school, public or private, should have to be saddled with students who are constantly disruptive, or just there to sell drugs, or there because a judge made them go to school. Even in the worst ghetto school it's a small percentage of students who cause 99% of the problems. Of course the law says we have to educate everybody; but it doesn't say they have the right to make an education difficult for everyone else. So put these students in a separate school set up to "meet their needs", which means they have an opportunity to get educated, and so does everyone else.

And while we're on the subject; K-12 schools should also enroll students like the universities do. Students pick the classes they want to take (with some required classes), which section of that class they want, and they pick the teacher.

BTW; at the university if no one takes your class you won't be there long.
Click to expand...

In regard to the disruptive elements, with today's technology, recording what happens in every classroom is not an impossibility.

Punishing the disruptive individuals would be both beneficial to most and easy to accomplish. Any complaint could be easily reviewed and addressed. Lord knows the need exists.

In today's litigious society, it would seem to be a prerequisite to conducting daily business in a forced attendance setting with disparate elements mandated to be present.
 
molten_dragon said:
No. I don't see a voucher system fixing anything. Work on improving public schools rather than just encouraging the people who can to leave them.
Click to expand...

How does restricting a person's choice to mandated failure a good thing?

Without the influx of cars made by Toyota and Honda we'd all be driving Edsels.

Not a ridiculously bad car. Okay, it was... But it could have been much better and the public knew it.


 
Surrealistik said:
One of the primary issues with the Singapore education system (and indeed the education system of most Southeast Asian countries) is it very strongly teaches to the test, so it's unsurprising that it does feature better test outcomes than education systems that are also excellent but opt for a more unconventional, diverse and fully encompassing approach to education such as say Finland or Canada. That having been said, I do think they have absolutely phenomenal system in place that can be learned from, but it is certainly not the end all/be all.

As to the US education system, it does have serious problems, and though I think culture is likely a substantial component of the issue, many of those problems are likely structural in nature.

Strong teachers unions likely aren't problematic; virtually all of the countries that surpass the US have stronger teachers unions, and teachers that enjoy roundly better pay and benefits.




Sure; my point is that in lieu of vouchers (which is likely to make public education even worse by diverting resources from it), we try to fix the fundamental issues with public education by studying other countries and integrating the things that work there and are workable here.
Click to expand...

If the test is a well designed and effective one, how is teaching to the test a bad thing?

If students do well on the test, they have mastered the needed knowledge.
 
Nap said:
Japan has a decent system, you basically have to apply to the high schools and your test scores largely determine where you go. So basically all the crappy schools get the worst students and troublemakers while the good schools bring in the students that are looking to excell.
Click to expand...

After living in Japan I can attest to the rigors of their high school system.

In Japan a student must compete to get into the better high schools.

This means studying on your own and in "Jukus" (tuition charged cram schools) as much as 6 hours a day after school at the middle school level (grades 7-9).

Once one earns the right to enter an appropriate level high school, graduation means acceptance to a college appropriate to that high school level.

Compulsory education ends at grade 9 and if you cant get into a high school, then you are done. Get vocational training and a job.

A good high school graduate in Japan is equivalent to a bachelors degree in the USA, except you have earned it by age 18

Most Japanese colleges are more social clubs than rigorous academic institutions.

As a portion of GDP Japan’s spending on education is the lowest of the 31 OECD countries, and has been for five years running.
 
Last edited:
GDViking said:
I would have just said no had that been an option. I am not opposed to private education, but not one penny of taxpayer money for them, particularly religious schools.
Click to expand...

If the goal of eduction is help the students, how are your restrictions essential to achieving that goal?
 
Masterhawk said:
America's public education system has received plenty of slack for being lackluster. Many have criticized it for falling behind other countries, dumbing down generations, and generally being inferior in quality to private schools. The problem with private schools is that parents have to pay $7,770 on average to send their kids there in contrast to public school which is funded by government (but cots $10,615 per student on average). The solution which many conservatives and libertarians support is school choice. In school choice, there are charter schools which act independently from the government but are still taxpayer funded.

What are your thoughts on school choice?
Click to expand...
I hate when people (usually the same people) come in to a poll and say there's no option for them, but there's no option for me. No offense intended, but you need to work on your poll presentation skills.

First off, your thread title is: Do you support a voucher system for school choice? Your poll question is: Do you support school choice?

Those aren't the same question.

Then, your closest poll option to my opinion is: no, private education is bad, which is kind of the opposite to my opinion yet still closest, in a weird way.

Here's my thoughts. Private school are fine. No problem with private schools at all. However, they should remain that... private. I want no public money whatsoever going to private schools, religious status or not being wholly irrelevant. If you want to send your kids to a private school, more power to ya, but it's solely on your dime. And no, you don't get a refund or credit on your taxes, either. It's an extra that you pay for.

I also don't mind charter schools, encourage them even, as long as they don't take away from regular schools.

So, do I...

...support a voucher system?: Absolutely not

...support school choice?: Yes, people should be free to choose.

There is no option for me, as the question are too mixed up.
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
I am fine with a voucher system for students in failing school districts. If a parent has a student in a failing inner city school, a voucher for a better private school could make all the difference.

However, I am not in any way for a voucher system for students that are not in failing schools. For example, if you have your kids in a good school district, but you don't like the fact the school's biology classes teach evolution rather than creationism, then fine, take them out and put them in a private school that shares your beliefs, but the taxpayers should not be footing the bill for that.

That is the problem with vouchers as they are almost always proposed now. They talk about them as though they can be a lifeline for students in failing schools, and that is true, they can be, but their real reason for them is not to help students in failing inner city schools, it is a provide a taxpayer funded kickback to their fundamentalist religious right voters.
Click to expand...

"The Taxpayers" are not "footing the Bill".

The money belongs to the parents. Those parents that choose to send their children to private schools and are afforded the use of vouchers are choosing to not "foot the bill" for the failed systems they wish to avoid.

Vouchers provide expanded choice and additional freedom.

This is not different than choosing a particular car model over another. Why, if I prefer to buy a Chevy, should I be forced to subsidize a Ford used by others and that I will never use?
 
Masterhawk said:
America's public education system has received plenty of slack for being lackluster. Many have criticized it for falling behind other countries, dumbing down generations, and generally being inferior in quality to private schools. The problem with private schools is that parents have to pay $7,770 on average to send their kids there in contrast to public school which is funded by government (but cots $10,615 per student on average). The solution which many conservatives and libertarians support is school choice. In school choice, there are charter schools which act independently from the government but are still taxpayer funded.

What are your thoughts on school choice?
Click to expand...

No; it's a move to destroy public education.
 
washunut said:
Most of the money used to pay for public schools come from property taxes. Those taxes are paid by all homeowners,including those with zero children in school.
Click to expand...

Exactly. the parent is already paying the bill.

If a parent chooses to make the expenditure to pay for the education of his children in a private school, that should be the justification for a voucher to relieve that additional burden.
 
Last edited:
Cephus said:
There was no other option unfortunately. I am fine with some form of voucher system so long as the rules are equal across the board. That means that if private schools take vouchers, they have to take all comers just like public schools do. They have to teach a minimum curriculum, just like public schools should. Because honestly, private schools are no better inherently than public schools, they can just throw out the bad students and pretend that their higher scores are because of their values or whatever, leaving the public schools to take in all of the dregs and look bad.
Click to expand...
Pretty much agree with this. IMO, public schools need more ability to toss the troublemakers. Opponents of that scream about every kid's right to an education. BS. If your kid is causing the school to consume so much in resources just to babysit their disruptive ass, then your kid is actively denying my kid their education. My kid has just as much right to a proper education as anyone else, and your kid shouldn't have the right to take that away.

Disclaimer (to all): This is not a Constitutional discussion, don't waste your time going off on a tangent about the definition of "right".
 
GDViking said:
I would love to see someone open a chain of pagan and Muslim based private schools in voucher states and see just how supportive the pro voucher folks will respond to their tax dollars going to them.
Click to expand...

Why would you love that?

Are they proven to produce superior academic results?
 
radcen said:
I hate when people (usually the same people) come in to a poll and say there's no option for them, but there's no option for me. No offense intended, but you need to work on your poll presentation skills.

First off, your thread title is: Do you support a voucher system for school choice? Your poll question is: Do you support school choice?

Those aren't the same question.

Then, your closest poll option to my opinion is: no, private education is bad, which is kind of the opposite to my opinion yet still closest, in a weird way.

Here's my thoughts. Private school are fine. No problem with private schools at all. However, they should remain that... private. I want no public money whatsoever going to private schools, religious status or not being wholly irrelevant. If you want to send your kids to a private school, more power to ya, but it's solely on your dime. And no, you don't get a refund or credit on your taxes, either. It's an extra that you pay for.

I also don't mind charter schools, encourage them even, as long as they don't take away from regular schools.

So, do I...

...support a voucher system?: Absolutely not

...support school choice?: Yes, people should be free to choose.

There is no option for me, as the question are too mixed up.
Click to expand...

You are separating the economic aspects of education when it comes making a choice in regard to the education of a parent's child.

This seems to be irrational.
 
jet57 said:
No; it's a move to destroy public education.
Click to expand...

The US has been employing the same system to improve the education of our children since we established the Department of Education almost 50 years ago.

During that time the outcomes of our system has moved our students from Number 1 to the middle of the pack.

Destroying this system and making a better one might be a good idea.
 
Since taxpayers foot the bill for schooling, I voted "Yes," allow the children, and their parents, to choose where they want to go to school. The voucher program would offer parents more freedom in where their kids could be educated, and, let's face it, private schools typically turn out better-educated kids. As a society, we're all better off when the kids are more educated.
 
molten_dragon said:
Because private schools aren't any better on average, they're just cherrypicking the best students.
Click to expand...

Um, no.

Students of all social classes can be either brilliant or dunces, your suggestion makes it sound as is smart kids only come from wealthy families.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom