Rumor has it that the Governor is going to take another run at vouchers. One aspect to voucher legislation I would like to see is a provision that allows public schools to reject or eject students based on the same criteria available to private schools. I don’t know if that means restricting the ability of private schools that take vouchers or enhancing the ability of public schools. But, if we’re going to pretend vouchers are good because they create competition, the playing field has to be level. That means not leaving public schools as nothing more than a dumping ground for difficult, expensive to educate students.
On the other hand, if we’re going to stick with the “every kid should have an education” policy choice; then we’re going to have to live with the fact that easy-to-educate kids subsidize the hard-to-educate kids. Vouchers – where we pretend that kids are widgets with associated expenses that are fixed and equivalent – disrupt that subsidy.
Very “socialist” comments from Mitch on this one:
(my paraphrase) “regardless of how wealthy a family is we have to give them the ability to go to private school”
Interesting
And Doug, you are spot on. Making the playing field level or it is just a farce.
It’s just one more policy than the Governor will never have to live down, because he’ll be long gone by the time the efficiacy (or lack thereof) becomes apparent.
I never understood the voucher idea.
Why does a parent with a child attending private school receive what is effectively a rebate of property taxes, but a landowner that doesn’t have children doesn’t receive the same rebate? Seems a bit ridiculous to me. Either we have public schools or don’t,.
Wow, you sound like one of the villains in an Ayn Rand novel. The “easy to educate” have to sacrifice their educational potential for the “hard to educate”?
Why? So you can feel less guilt? Or something?
Once again, like charter schools, vouchers are going to be used principally by inner city denizens. They will have little or no effect in the ‘burbs. Once you get wealthy enough to be able to move to a better district to get “good” schools, the value of vouchers is nil. But for the poor who can’t afford to move to a “good” district, they’re a godsend.
I would one-up Mitch. Most of the gains to education accrue to the person being educated. As such, for the middle and upper classes, I really don’t see why we should have tuition free schools, public or otherwise.
We can talk about how society benefits from having an educated populace, but when you run the numbers the costs of eduction to society far outweigh the benefits.
So I can feel less guilt? No. Because that’s the way our system works right now. They don’t throw a kid into a classroom and say, “O.k, teach Billy $3,000 worth; then stop.” What really happens is that a teacher gets Albert, Billy, and Chris. Albert is a trouble maker, Billy is special needs, and Chris is a smart kid who follows instructions. Consequently, the teacher and the school spend a lot more time dealing with Albert and Billy, and Chris is effectively subsidizing their education.
The private school would bounce Albert after he acted up one too many times. Maybe with Billy they’d say “gee, we really don’t have the training or the resources necessary to meet his needs; awfully sorry about that.” But, Chris and his voucher, they’d snap right up. Now the public school, which doesn’t have as much discretion in the matter, is charged with educating Albert and Billy without the funds previously allocated to Chris. (And, for that matter, without his good influence.)
And you know this how, exactly? Do you actually have any experience with private schools, or is this yet another thing you heard on NPR?
My experience is exactly the opposite. The tuition of the troublemakers is just as green as everybody elses, and they bend over backwards not to expel the troublemakers.
Isn’t it true that any school that receives funds from the Department of Education must operate in a nondiscriminatory manner? If so, cherry picking students on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, disability, or age is not likely to happen. Too, public schools are permitted to expel students for bad behavior, and do.
Voucher legislation should restrict use to only those schools that have state accreditation; not all private schools are accredited, most that are not are religious based schools.
Well, katie, it may be true, but that doesn’t mean it’s actual. If you look at classroom stats comparing Indianapolis Public Schools with our incontinent Charter droppings you’ll find that IPS enrolls twice as many students with learning disabilities, and nearly twice as many non-English speakers. And if you look still closer you’ll find that of children with catastrophic learning disabilities are, without exception, being educated at the expense of the public schools, because, among other things, there’s no reason for parents to add the extra level of paperwork involved in admission to a charter when an individually-tailored program meeting their child’s needs–their legal right–is already guaranteed, and when the public schools are the ones with the resources and expertise to provide it.
Here’s a rule of thumb: if it worked out fairly, they wouldn’t be interested. The idea is to benefit the Neil Bushes of the world, not poverty-line households in Center Township. If we really wanted to help the underprivileged we do it, and we’d have an actual explanation of how it’s really gonna work, not a series of joke platitudes.
Oh, and, buzz, “Troublemakers are green” is a riot, thanks. I take it your experience of private schools comes as a student, not an administrator? Because I’ve suggested that Bishop Chatard just build an underground tunnel right to Broad Ripple High, so anyone sent to the principal’s office could just keep walkin’.
So, again, the education of the “good” has to be sacrificed on the altar of “fairness”? Why?
Education is either philosophically grounded upon some doctrine based upon a concept of fairness, or it isn’t. If it isn’t why not just let the “good” build their own schools instead of alloting tax funds for the purpose at all? You are still taxing people who don’t want and/or have children. How fair is that? Who is subsidizing who?
You want to educate your kids, your way? Then, it’s easy as pie. Pay for it yourself. Seems to work well enough for parochial schools.
.
Like I said, since the benefits of education accrue largely to those being educated, and very little of it accrues to society at large, I don’t necessarily disagree that families should pay to have their own children educated. At least, it is a conversation that we should have. Like other middle class entitlements, a conversation about means testing is in order.
One of the places I worked was a charter school that only educated kids that IPS had kicked out for discipline issues. I don’t know if it still operates that way, but if so, it blows away the stereotype on both ends.
Buzz said “very little of it accrues to society at large”. Just who is this “society” he’s talking about if not ALL of us, including those being educated? And I must admit that I find it really depressing that everything in this dang country anymore devolves down to a dollar figure. You know, sometimes education just for the sake of personal enlightenment and advancement is reason enough without having to cost justify every penny. If you can’t see past the nickles and dimes, then you’re really missing the point…
Get rid of all education. Let’s just go back to the apprentice system. Once you are seven years old – BAM, you get to go work with Ernie, the master WalMart greeter.
vouchers are a scheme to put tax money into the hands of private businesses and parochial schools. Where these have been tried, student performance has not risen, the vouchers are not accepted by large numbers of private schools or the students are not enrolled because they do not meet the admission criteria, and the voucher does not cover the tuition at most private schools. This is simply a subsidy (tax rebate) to middle to upper class parents who can use it to move their child to a private school. The inner city poor get no use from them. See Washington DC under the great reformer Rhee, Cleveland, and Milwaukee. As for low performing rural schools, the students with a voucher would have no other option–and no, private schools will not open to reap the cash–refer to the experience with the nclb funds here in Indiana or the other states–providers wanted to serve urban areas, not sparsly populated rural areas. As for education benefitting the one being educated more than the community–only a free market theorist would believe that-along with the idea that tax cuts for the wealthy will increase tax revenues and increase jobs and investment. We have never seen this happen, even after the latest 8 years of this policy.
mitch wants to shovel tax dollars to his pals in parochial schools and in the private school businesses. End of story.
Well, I have no evidence to know what motivates Daniels to support school vouchers, nor do I care. What I do know and support is that vouchers will get one step closer to expanding educational options for all students. Just as not all students arrive in the classroom on an equal economic, emotional/physical or cognitive footing, not all can benefit with the one-size-fits-all educational model. It is precisely because I do embrace the concept of educational fairness (i.e., each student gets what s/he needs to succeed – including additional funding, when necessary) that I consider vouchers to be an extension of that concept.
Katie, you ignored my information on why vouchers do not expand educational options to all students. The vouchers are not large enough to cover tuition at the private schools, so the only option is the parochial school–if available. Providers will not operate in areas without large populations. And private schools do not usually accept the vouchers or concoct admissions criteria to prevent students from being enrolled. These schools, as well as charters, tend to not serve or enroll handicapped/disabled students. Or, if enrolled, they are served, through contract, by the public school (IPS) instead of the charter.
I am not sure what you mean by a one size fits all educational model–teachers teach to the student.
Tom, it’s a subtle point, I must admit. Maybe this example will show what I mean.
Let’s say that you are 16 years old, and are making the decision to stay in school or drop out. What is the value of finishing high school?
The cost to society of that extra two years is pretty clear. In Indiana, it’s probably 12,000. The cost to the student is whatever salary he or she gives up to stay in school.
The benefits are the additional lifetime earnings of a high school grad vs. a dropout. They’re not insignificant. But the benefits to society are the additional tax revenue from those earnings. It’s a pretty small percentage of those earnings.
And so on. Do the calculation for each student at each step of his or her educational process. You’ll soon find that educational costs are such that, even with the substantial increase in lifetime earnings of, say, a college grad vs. a high school dropout, the tax revenues generated are insufficient to give a positive rate of return.
About the expenditures avoided?
Surely the daunting prospects of getting and keeping a well paying job because one dropped out of high school and the use of welfare, food stamps, wic, Hoosier health wise, Medicaid, free and reduced lunch, and such has some value.
Private, parochial and charter schools intentionally avoid trying to educate special needs children. If you had an autistic child for example, good luck on finding a non-public school that would accept him/her as a student. The voucher system is for more middle income parents to be able to send their non-special needs kid to Montessori.
Again, all schools—public or private—that accept Department of Education/federal funds are subject to federal statutes prohibiting discrimination – Title VI, Title IX, Section 504. Likewise, said schools are also covered by Title III of the ADA, which covers all special education students…
To Katie’s point, I’ve been involved with 4 charter schools doing IT work, and all had a lottery to decide what kids get in.
If you’re going to go on some rant about how the lottery is fixed, then you need to produce some evidence.