school vouchers

[Michchamp]

I keep hearing the uninformed mention school vouchers as a solution to the "problems" in our educational system. The "problems" apparently being that too much money is going to public school teachers, and not enough to scam artists and religious nutjobs.

this article details incidents.

the logic behind it makes absolutely no sense either: so schools are "failing" - a term of course that is never tied to any specific examples, or else fingers are pointed at examples of poorly-funded and managed school districts in impoverished areas - and you'll help schools "succeed" by taking more money away from them and giving them to a garden-variety hucksters who open up a school in the middle of the night, then disappear with the cash as soon as they can (?):

Recently, in Washington, D.C., another school system with a long and controversial history with vouchers, a review by The Washington Post found that lack of oversight of that district’s program lead to “hundreds of students” using voucher dollars to “attend schools that are unaccredited or are in unconventional settings, such as a family-run K-12 school operating out of a storefront, a Nation of Islam school based in a converted Deanwood residence, and a school built around the philosophy of a Bulgarian psychotherapist.”
​

this one is good too:

The Wisconsin state program is a state roll-out of a program that has been operating in Milwaukee for years – the same program that recently saw a private school rip off $2 million in taxpayer money and close its doors in the middle of the night. Leaders of that school were then unearthed by Milwaukee journalists in Florida, where they “now live in a gated community … by the beach” and operate – not surprisingly – a private religious school that can get taxpayer money from the state.
​

 

[biggunsbob]

Damn it... Fuck those people..

 

[byco42]

Knee-jerk reactions not-withstanding, public schools squander hundreds of millions with impunity.

 

[Michchamp]

Knee-jerk reactions not-withstanding, public schools squander hundreds of millions with impunity.

there should be specific examples of this provided.

along with the rationale explaining why - assuming its even true - this justifies allowing dodgier charlatans to set up charter schools and pocket some of those millions while being even less accountable to public audits or budgetary concerns.

 

[Gulo Blue]

I don't have a problem with the idea of charter schools or vouchers, but if the requirements to stick to the government curriculum is lessened, in exchange, the requirement to report all available information regarding achievement should be increased. I'd like to see a system that allows some experimentation because there are ideas out there about how teaching could be better with technology.

But the charter schools have to be required to report everything if they want public funding. No trade secrets if they find something that works better. Copyright for their software is fine, but how it works needs to be public domain.

 

[byco42]

there should be specific examples of this provided.

along with the rationale explaining why - assuming its even true - this justifies allowing dodgier charlatans to set up charter schools and pocket some of those millions while being even less accountable to public audits or budgetary concerns.

Well ... I'll see your two examples ...

This.

And this.

...and raise you the public school systems of most of the 50 states.

With this.

Michigan could have alone saved $500,000,000 from 1992-2009 just by staffing responsibly.

"Nationally, states could have saved—and could continue to save—more than $24 billion annually if they had increased/decreased the employment of administrators and other non-teaching staff at the same rate as students between FY 1992 and FY 2009."

Two articles, one study, no basement bloggers.

 

[Michchamp]

Well ... I'll see your two examples ...

This.

And this.

...and raise you the public school systems of most of the 50 states.

With this.

Michigan could have alone saved $500,000,000 from 1992-2009 just by staffing responsibly.

"Nationally, states could have saved?and could continue to save?more than $24 billion annually if they had increased/decreased the employment of administrators and other non-teaching staff at the same rate as students between FY 1992 and FY 2009."

Two articles, one study, no basement bloggers.

your last two links cite "EdChoice" an organization my article cites as being dedicated to eliminating public schools in the U.S. and replacing them entirely with charter schools, like the ones cited for having no accountability and/or being run entirely by charlatans. They're the ones creating the problem.

I think maybe you should find another source...

the LA Times' article cites a "report" from the DC-based National Council on Teacher Quality... which sounds suspiciously like part of the problem. Holy Family University issued this piece on them (HFU is Catholic by the way, so you can trust them at least if you don't trust me, right?)

the JSOnline article doesn't include the actual report they cite, but contains this:

Mostly behind the scenes, Doyle and Barrett have been considering whether there should be a change in the way MPS is run. Barrett has visited mayors and school officials in cities such as Chicago and New York to find out more about how mayoral control is working. The situation here could also be influenced by the new U.S. Secretary of Education, Arne Duncan, who has begun directly calling for more cities to adopt mayoral control.
​

again...

all this biased information trashing public schools by organizations that will profit from that & the "think tanks" and trade organizations that they hire to go after public schools are a problem. are responsible for the problem and the public perceptions... I'm talking about the problem, and you're citing the people responsible for the problem!

it's insidious, and it's not a Democrat/Republican issue either, since a lot of high-profile democrats are involved in the power/cash grab as well. Obama's Education Secretary is as anti-union and pro-business/for-profit schools as you can get. Conservatives love the guy (or should if they actually knew what he stood for).

 

[byco42]

So information that challenges the hallowed palisades of public schools is biased and unreliable and information that trashes organizations that challenges public schools is sacrosanct. Because the people who challenge public schools are greedy profiteers and the people in the public schools are altruistic, tireless and infinitely charitable.

Public schools = ever accountable. And the public is being mislead by people who are deliberately purporting a lie. I went to public high-school. It was a zoo without fences.

What is "insidious" is the entire paradigm, that was conceived 200 years ago and has been obsolete from the time I went to kindergarten.

 

[Michchamp]

So information that challenges the hallowed palisades of public schools is biased and unreliable and information that trashes organizations that challenges public schools is sacrosanct. Because the people who challenge public schools are greedy profiteers and the people in the public schools are altruistic, tireless and infinitely charitable.

...

Well, if I've failed to convince you, then I've failed to convince you.

 

[food4thought]

Michchamp, I agree that there are individuals and groups involved that are simply looking for easy profit and not interested in providing a superior education. I think you would agree that the same could be said of elements within the government run school system. The simple truth is that greed and corruption are human nature, which is why I also think your thoughts on oversight and accountability for charter schools are very important (but who over see's the overseers lol).

All that said, when confronted with evidence that does not fit with your position, instead of actually engaging in intelligent discussion over the evidence you resort to attacking the character of the source (ad hominim). This is a tactic that will "fail to convince" anyone with half a brain. You're better than that... I think.

 

[Michchamp]

Michchamp, I agree that there are individuals and groups involved that are simply looking for easy profit and not interested in providing a superior education. I think you would agree that the same could be said of elements within the government run school system. The simple truth is that greed and corruption are human nature, which is why I also think your thoughts on oversight and accountability for charter schools are very important (but who over see's the overseers lol).

All that said, when confronted with evidence that does not fit with your position, instead of actually engaging in intelligent discussion over the evidence you resort to attacking the character of the source (ad hominim). This is a tactic that will "fail to convince" anyone with half a brain. You're better than that... I think.

except that's not what I did.

the article i posted cites these "Centrist" lobbyists, trade associations "think tanks" etc. created and funded to attack public schools because they are paid to do so... and then he cited those same associates for "evidence" to refute my claim. it's absurd.

It's like I'm saying "ohio football is sleazy; just look at what Jim Tressel did." and he's saying "here is an article that says otherwise." and the article is written by Jim Tressel's agent... pointing that out isn't an ad hominem attack.

 

[Gulo Blue]

Nevermind. I'm dumb reading.

 

[Michchamp]

Nevermind. I'm dumb reading.

What?

 

[Gulo Blue]

What?

I misread a post. Responded based on the misreading. Saw the mistake and deleted the post.

 

[Michchamp]

I misread a post. Responded based on the misreading. Saw the mistake and deleted the post.

It was weird because you're timing occurred just as I was quoting it

 

[food4thought]

except that's not what I did.

the article i posted cites these "Centrist" lobbyists, trade associations "think tanks" etc. created and funded to attack public schools because they are paid to do so... and then he cited those same associates for "evidence" to refute my claim. it's absurd.

It's like I'm saying "ohio football is sleazy; just look at what Jim Tressel did." and he's saying "here is an article that says otherwise." and the article is written by Jim Tressel's agent... pointing that out isn't an ad hominem attack.

~facepalm~

You repeated the ad hominem. And you still haven't bothered to refute one piece of evidence provided in the links. Regardless of the actual character of the recipient of the ad hominem, attacking the character of the source without any regard for the actual substance of their argument is still a classic example of ad hominem. I could just as easily look at the article you posted and find examples of bias in the groups that funded the studies sited in favor of the article's view, and then refuse to address the evidence because I disagree with the views of those who funded the studies. Just saying...

I have no opinion on the school voucher debate, so I'm done here.

 

[byco42]

Slate walked back considerably it original assertion that "thousands" of schools in Louisiana and Tennessee teach creationism (but they are allowed to! Gasp in horror! Because We, the People, have figured it all out!)

Correction, Jan. 27, 2014: This article's headlines originally suggested that thousands of public schools in Louisiana and Tennessee are teaching creationism. While those schools are permitted to teach creationism, it is unclear how many are actually teaching it, and the headlines have been updated to reflect this.

Salon.com has its own axes to grind. Defending communism is one of its pet projects.

 

[Michchamp]

~facepalm~

You repeated the ad hominem. And you still haven't bothered to refute one piece of evidence provided in the links....

Did you miss this?

...

the LA Times' article cites a "report" from the DC-based National Council on Teacher Quality... which sounds suspiciously like part of the problem. Holy Family University issued this piece on them (HFU is Catholic by the way, so you can trust them at least if you don't trust me, right?)

...

Or are you just doing that thing where you cherry pick a point of contention from someone's post, and ignore everything you can't argue against?

because if you clicked that link it completely destroys the methodology the National Council on Teacher Quality used to create their hit piece on the public school district there.

 

[Michchamp]

Slate walked back considerably it original assertion that "thousands" of schools in Louisiana and Tennessee teach creationism (but they are allowed to! Gasp in horror! Because We, the People, have figured it all out!)

Correction, Jan. 27, 2014: This article's headlines originally suggested that thousands of public schools in Louisiana and Tennessee are teaching creationism. While those schools are permitted to teach creationism, it is unclear how many are actually teaching it, and the headlines have been updated to reflect this.

Salon.com has its own axes to grind. Defending communism is one of its pet projects.

ah... COMMUNISM. Say no more. We all know that's bad.

here's the difference though:

those sites certainly have a liberal bent, but they feature articles from lots of commentators, some of whom are tied to the actual Democratic party, others who have liberal opinions, sure, but are not Obama apologists. There are articles on the front page of the site right now attacking Obama for failing to veto the farm bill and agreeing with the need to cut food stamps.

You're citing EdChoice as evidence, when as I pointed out they are an organization founded and funded solely to attack public school systems. They're not acting in the public interest or anything like that; they're a paid trade association for the charter schools.

It's like pointing to an article from Coca Cola's publicist as evidence of why children should drink Coke instead of apple juice.

 

[byco42]

You're citing EdChoice as evidence, when as I pointed out they are an organization founded and funded solely to attack public school systems. They're not acting in the public interest or anything like that; they're a paid trade association for the charter schools.

"America’s K-12 public education system has experienced tremendous historical growth in employment, according to the U.S. Department of Education’s National Center for Education Statistics. Between fiscal year (FY) 1950 and FY 2009, the number of K-12 public school students in the United States increased by 96 percent, while the number of full-time equivalent (FTE) school employees grew 386 percent. Public schools grew staffing at a rate four times faster than the increase in students over that time period. Of those personnel, teachers’ numbers increased 252 percent, while administrators and other non-teaching staff experienced growth of 702 percent, more than seven times the increase in students."

This ain't speculation. The study went on to calculate what that has cost the taxpayers over that time. From 1992 to 2009, the conservative estimate was $24,000,000,000 for the U.S.

I don't see the NEA making noise about this.