Republicans in Congress Address Major Issue

[dilbert firestorm]

Originally Posted by budman33

They could but they don't.
.

they can't or they'll lose funding.

the school lunch program is federally funded. that means there are strings attach to the monies being sent to state public schools.

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

The government is mainly interested in control, not education. If they were interested in education, we would have had vouchers long ago.

Private schools are not required to accept and deal with the "troubled children". Where will they be schooled? Who'll pay to transport kids to the schools they choose? If there is but one great school among ten, that one great school cannot embrace and educate a student population equivalent to ten schools.

[CuteOldGuy]

So we should deny children a quality education because some are troubled?

If there is a market for education of troubled children, the market will so provide. And the chances of that child having a good school experience is much greater in a private setting over public.

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

So we should deny children a quality education because some are troubled?

If there is a market for education of troubled children, the market will so provide. And the chances of that child having a good school experience is much greater in a private setting over public.

What use is a voucher if the school of choice refuses to admit the recalcitrant, the disruptive, and the special needs student?

Furthermore, if school performance is based on student performance, and a school is forced to deal with a student body wholly comprised of the recalcitrant, the disruptive, and the special needs students (those rejected by other schools), won't this school necessarily perform below other schools that do not have those students in their population? Where will these students go? Under a voucher system, they are already in the "best" school they can get into.

Vouchers no doubt will greatly benefit some the the average and most of the above average students. The rest will be relegated to subpar schools worse than the public schools at present.

[CuteOldGuy]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

What use is a voucher if the school of choice refuses to admit the recalcitrant, the disruptive, and the special needs student? You have the mistaken assumption that all schools will refuse admittance. Just the opposite is likely. If there are underserved students in the population, each with a bag of cash to spend, schools will open to take advantage of that cash. They will do so by specializing in the education of those students. If they are no good, parents will go elsewhere. Further, there are all kinds of charities that would be free to offer services to these students.

Furthermore, if school performance is based on student performance, and a school is forced to deal with a student body wholly comprised of the recalcitrant, the disruptive, and the special needs students (those rejected by other schools), won't this school necessarily perform below other schools that do not have those students in their population? Where will these students go? Under a voucher system, they are already in the "best" school they can get into. So your solution is to keep average to good students in an environment where their education is limited due to there being disruptive and slow students in the class. Why are we catering to the lowest denominator? One of the reasons our education system is so glaringly bad is that teachers are required to teach to the lowest level of student, rather than challenging the better students to excel. No wonder kids get bored with school. And no wonder they get in trouble. School is hell for a bright student who wants to learn.

Vouchers no doubt will greatly benefit some the the average and most of the above average students. The rest will be relegated to subpar schools worse than the public schools at present. Actually, those students will be better served. Why are you so connected to the status quo, which we know is failing? Public schools simply warehouse those students now, and promote them without teaching them anything just to get them out of class. Vouchers will allow students to be treated as individuals, rather than simply part of a group.

The current system is bad for all students. Vouchers will give each student a chance.

[dilbert firestorm]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

The current system is bad for all students. Vouchers will give each student a chance.

not to mention their parents

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

The current system is bad for all students. Vouchers will give each student a chance.

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

You have the mistaken assumption that all schools will refuse admittance. Just the opposite is likely.

The reality is, the best schools - those which can afford to pick and choose its students - do not have to tolerate student shenanigans unless daddy is very, very rich. A student who fails, academically or behaviorally, can be washed-out because there is always another student with a voucher waiting to get into the "best" school. Eventually, the only "choice" for the poor performing student is the poorer performing school - and this is relative.

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

If there are underserved students in the population, each with a bag of cash to spend, schools will open to take advantage of that cash.

Perhaps, but since all schools are measured on student performance, any school embracing predominantly poor performers will always be a poorer performing school than those that don't - "Catch 22". The 'Bell Curve' is a reality in human endeavor. Some excel, most are average and a few fail. BTW, these schools are already out there for parents who can afford that option. There are excellent private schools for the wealthy, best and brightest. There are also academies that "graduate" students who can't make the grade in public schools, but again, daddy has to have money.

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

They will do so by specializing in the education of those students. If they are no good, parents will go elsewhere.

"Catch 22" again - when those students change schools, if they are allowed to, they will bring down the new school's performance rating.

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Further, there are all kinds of charities that would be free to offer services to these students.

"The Second Mile"? j/k

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

So your solution is to keep average to good students in an environment where their education is limited due to there being disruptive and slow students in the class.

Are you not the product of a public school? Did it not work for you?

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Why are we catering to the lowest denominator? One of the reasons our education system is so glaringly bad is that teachers are required to teach to the lowest level of student, rather than challenging the better students to excel. No wonder kids get bored with school. And no wonder they get in trouble. School is hell for a bright student who wants to learn.

I do not disagree with anything you've written, but now you have here joined me in the quandary of the voucher system. A voucher system will lead to a school system that is segregated on the basis of student performance, and too often student performance is related to socioeconomic status.

A more honest approach (and one that will likely produce exactly the same situation as the voucher system) would be one that makes students compete, like in Japan, for those positions in better schools rather than merely affording a disgruntled parent the right to pick and choose which school their recalcitrant little Johnny goes to. It makes the child and the parent accountable; whereas, the voucher system only makes the schools and teachers accountable.

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Actually, those students will be better served. Why are you so connected to the status quo, which we know is failing? Public schools simply warehouse those students now, and promote them without teaching them anything just to get them out of class.

Again I don't disagree, and I'm not defending the status quo. Make the child and the parent more accountable, and the public school system will once again serve the needs of this nation.

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Vouchers will allow students to be treated as individuals, rather than simply part of a group.

The truth is, few teenagers actually seek individuation - most are trying to immerse themselves in the herd that is their peers. Plus, this idea that everybody's little Johnny is the "best and the brightest" is what has brought the public school system to its present deplorable condition. "No Child Left Behind" operates on the premise that everyone can and will excel in each and every classroom. However, in every human endeavor, the 'Bell Curve' is a testament to the fallibility of the notion that everyone operates at the same level. Set up a public school system that functions on the dictates of the 'Bell Curve'; then, you will maximally challenge every student academically and produce educated students because the students are necessarily, for their own sakes, more involved.

But alas, it shall never be. The disgruntled parents and the culpable lawyers will sue any school system that suggests that little Johnny is not and cannot be as accomplished a student as little Susie.

[CuteOldGuy]

It's more complicated than this, and public schools are much different now than when I was a student. Public schools today are designed to produce willing subservient workers, not critical thinkers. Classes are dumbed down so the more poorly performing student won't "feel bad" about himself. This leaves the brighter students bored, and dampens their motivation to learn. I just graduated my last child from High School, and it was not easy. All my kids were bright and identified as gifted, but getting them in a program that would motivate them was near impossible. My daughter didn't have to study until she got to medical school. I would have LOVED having a voucher to get them in a good school. Sure, there was the occasional individual teacher who wanted to educate, but most of them are phoning it in, and complaining about their pay. But the system even rewards the poor teachers rather than the good ones! It's an insane system.

Government (public) schools do not like individual achievement, it is all geared toward group achievement. It's disgraceful. We need private schools just to get the government out of it, and allow students who want to learn, to learn.

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

It's more complicated than this, and public schools are much different now than when I was a student. Public schools today are designed to produce willing subservient workers, not critical thinkers.

Perhaps you've grown too nostalgic. Public schools since their inception have always been there to provide industry with an educated work force - even when we were in school.

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Classes are dumbed down so the more poorly performing student won't "feel bad" about himself. This leaves the brighter students bored, and dampens their motivation to learn. I just graduated my last child from High School, and it was not easy.

Agreed - the premise behind "No Child Left behind" is fallacious.

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

All my kids were bright and identified as gifted, but getting them in a program that would motivate them was near impossible. My daughter didn't have to study until she got to medical school. I would have LOVED having a voucher to get them in a good school.

What about the Japanese model wherein students compete for positions in higher and better schools? Would you have been for that; especially if good teachers were similarly promoted and rewarded within the system?

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Sure, there was the occasional individual teacher who wanted to educate, but most of them are phoning it in, and complaining about their pay. But the system even rewards the poor teachers rather than the good ones! It's an insane system.

I cannot agree with you here. I know enough teachers to know that most entered the profession with honorable intentions and cognitively aware that they would not be well compensated. If you asked a teacher what his/her greatest concern might be, it won't be pay - it's classroom discipline because parents haven't taught their little Johnny how to behave in a formal social setting.

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Government (public) schools do not like individual achievement, it is all geared toward group achievement. It's disgraceful. We need private schools just to get the government out of it, and allow students who want to learn, to learn.

Again I disagree. A "good" government operates on meritocracy. The voucher system promotes crony capitalism.

For the most part, we are going to have to agree to disagree.

[CuteOldGuy]

Ok, we can disagree. I just want to know why you support the public school system that is known to be a failure?

BTW, I taught at a university that was primarily known as a "teacher's college" so I know that there are many dedicated teachers, but there are many who go into teaching because every other program is too hard. I had to tutor a young lady, who already had a bachelor's degree in social science with a business math course. She couldn't find a job in social service, so she wanted to go into teaching. She did not know that you had to line up decimals in order to add up a column of numbers. She was a college graduate! And now she wanted to teach! And she wasn't the only one in that position. The dedicated ones would come to me and tell me how bad their classes are. In the math education classes, they weren't teaching how to teach math, they were teaching math. And not advanced math, they were teaching adding and subtracting!

Privatizing education may not be perfect, but it is damn better than what the government tries to portray as "education."

[Laz]

I would add to this discussion but COG made all my points for me.

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Ok, we can disagree. I just want to know why you support the public school system that is known to be a failure?

Again, I do not support our present system. It is not working. I believe adopting the Japanese model would be better because it would force little Johnny and the parent to be more accountable. Yet I do not believe it can be adopted and survive in our litigious society.

No one has yet satisfactorily explained how the voucher system will deal with the issues I raised above.

No doubt there are teachers like you described, but I "believe" (IDK) they are a minority. I have one example of a charter school established to replace a failing public school. It was a commercial - for profit - enterprise. It operated for one year. The backers bailed in the final weeks of the spring term, and they took their "profit" and ran. The faculty and staff were not paid for their final months, and the school building (a former public school building they were renting from the city) was abandoned back to the city in great need of repair if it is ever to be used again. Again, it's a single incident, but I've seen this "business model" used over and over again in fly-by-night retail outlets.

[Doove]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

No one has yet satisfactorily explained how the voucher system will deal with the issues I raised above.

You didn't raise any issues above. You're just talking nonsense and you make no sense.

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by Doove

You didn't raise any issues above. You're just talking nonsense and you make no sense.

Doofus, go back to playing with yourself.

[CuteOldGuy]

Doove can't stand it if people can discuss issues without questioning each other's sexuality. Because I have enjoyed our discussion I don't mean this seriously, however, to pacify Doove . . . IB, you're a faggot.



Didn't mean that, just keeping Doove happy.