School Vouchers

[SilverShadow]

If the district thinks they would be better suited in providing good teachers while the neighboring school districts are paying $5,000 to $10,000 more per year, than go for it, I guess. It would be a stupid decision but go for it, I guess.

 

Remember also when you reduce teacher's salaries, most of the time, you reduce the minimal salaries of the bus drivers, cafeteria workers, secretaries, and the like and then cannot draw good people to serve in those roles or in case of the cafeteria workers prepare and serve the rolls.

 

There are way more teachers than there are jobs in all districts. I don't think a teacher can move, even if they wanted to.

[cch5432]

OK.....

 

Now explain how much more effective and efficient a school will need to become. Outside of payroll, which is 75 to 80 percent of its operating costs, how do you become more efficient - reduce the amount of food kids are allowed to eat while charging more in the cafeteria?

What you suggest is NOT the model used in private education currently. If the private school model is so effective then why are their employees so grossly underpaid?:thumb:

When the schools are pitted in competition for each other because parents have an actual voice in their child's education (like a private school) the schools will be forced to be more efficient. Whether it is cutting salaries, saving money on transportation, or who knows, competition can only foster more efficiency.

[HHSDad]

When the schools are pitted in competition for each other because parents have an actual voice in their child's education (like a private school) the schools will be forced to be more efficient. Whether it is cutting salaries, saving money on transportation, or who knows, competition can only foster more efficiency.

I disagree. Private schools aren't better because they're private. They're better because more is expected of the kids, especially from the parents. The worst schools IMO are the results of the long term effect of having a majority of kids and parents who don't care or have little time to care. This leads to teacher apathy, poor facilities, low graduation rates, etc. By forcing these schools to compete, you will simply be closing them up and shipping the same kids and parents off to run down a "better" school.

 

What is needed is an incentive for kids to do well in school. And KERA isn't it. Nor is KEES. College money means nothing to a kid that has no intention of going to college, let alone graduating from high school. In order to salvage the public school system, the education system needs to be torn down, keep the things that are effective, and haul away the rest. Decide what is really important to your kids and teach that. Quit telling kids they'll never amount to anything if they don't go to college. Give them goals that they are interested in and can reach. Teach them what they need to know in order to be sucessful in life. Quit doing it the same old way.

[ladiesbballcoach]

When the schools are pitted in competition for each other because parents have an actual voice in their child's education (like a private school) the schools will be forced to be more efficient. Whether it is cutting salaries, saving money on transportation, or who knows, competition can only foster more efficiency.

 

You forget the obvious choice. Cutting programs. Which could end up doing the exact thing of what you think vouchers would do for a public school.

 

State law says we HAVE to have all these special education programs for the disabled. So, we cannot cut those programs, but have to spend the money there. And the teacher/student ratio has to be low in that regard.

 

We have to have teachers in English, Math, Science, Social Studies. So we cannot cut there.

 

Schools district are required by law to have some sort of alternative education choice for those students who are failing.

 

We can cut in those areas in which we are not REQUIRED to have teachers, band, chorus, business, ag, home ec, athletics, Gifted and Talented programs.

 

So, when a local districts hands are tied in where they can make cuts, than the kids who might end up seeing their programs cut (remember the other programs cannot be touched because of state and federal guidelines that private schools do not have) are the best and the brightest that would then end up going to private schools even more.

[ladiesbballcoach]

I disagree. Private schools aren't better because they're private. They're better because more is expected of the kids, especially from the parents. The worst schools IMO are the results of the long term effect of having a majority of kids and parents who don't care or have little time to care. This leads to teacher apathy, poor facilities, low graduation rates, etc. By forcing these schools to compete, you will simply be closing them up and shipping the same kids and parents off to run down a "better" school.

 

What is needed is an incentive for kids to do well in school. And KERA isn't it. Nor is KEES. College money means nothing to a kid that has no intention of going to college, let alone graduating from high school. In order to salvage the public school system, the education system needs to be torn down, keep the things that are effective, and haul away the rest. Decide what is really important to your kids and teach that. Quit telling kids they'll never amount to anything if they don't go to college. Give them goals that they are interested in and can reach. Teach them what they need to know in order to be sucessful in life. Quit doing it the same old way.

 

AMEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[cch5432]

I disagree. Private schools aren't better because they're private. They're better because more is expected of the kids, especially from the parents. The worst schools IMO are the results of the long term effect of having a majority of kids and parents who don't care or have little time to care. This leads to teacher apathy, poor facilities, low graduation rates, etc. By forcing these schools to compete, you will simply be closing them up and shipping the same kids and parents off to run down a "better" school.

 

What is needed is an incentive for kids to do well in school. And KERA isn't it. Nor is KEES. College money means nothing to a kid that has no intention of going to college, let alone graduating from high school. In order to salvage the public school system, the education system needs to be torn down, keep the things that are effective, and haul away the rest. Decide what is really important to your kids and teach that. Quit telling kids they'll never amount to anything if they don't go to college. Give them goals that they are interested in and can reach. Teach them what they need to know in order to be sucessful in life. Quit doing it the same old way.

School vouchers would give parents more choice and a louder voice in their child's edumacation. They would have the power to remove their child from the school if things did not go to their satisfaction. With the power to actually do something, parents would be more involved.

 

This is not to say that some parents still would remain uninvolved. I don't know the solution to that. But for the parents that want to have a voice in their children's education but can not afford a private school, school vouchers would allow them to have an actual choice, as well as force the schools to compete against each other.

[ladiesbballcoach]

School vouchers would give parents more choice and a louder voice in their child's edumacation. They would have the power to remove their child from the school if things did not go to their satisfaction. With the power to actually do something, parents would be more involved.

 

This is not to say that some parents still would remain uninvolved. I don't know the solution to that. But for the parents that want to have a voice in their children's education but can not afford a private school, school vouchers would allow them to have an actual choice, as well as force the schools to compete against each other.

 

As usual with education discussions, you are right and you are wrong because you are looking through it as it affects urban schools.

 

How would it help a parent who lives in a rural county whose district has one elementary school, one middle school and/or one high school.

 

They could move to a different country as it is now and have their kids attend a different school without a voucher.

[cch5432]

As usual with education discussions, you are right and you are wrong because you are looking through it as it affects urban schools.

 

How would it help a parent who lives in a rural county whose district has one elementary school, one middle school and/or one high school.

 

They could move to a different country as it is now and have their kids attend a different school without a voucher.

You may be right, but I ask this:

 

How would it hurt a parent who lives in a rural county whose district has one elementary school, one middle school and/or one high school? Certainly it would help urban areas, and potentially help rural areas. Better than what is up now.

[ladiesbballcoach]

You may be right, but I ask this:

 

How would it hurt a parent who lives in a rural county whose district has one elementary school, one middle school and/or one high school? Certainly it would help urban areas, and potentially help rural areas. Better than what is up now.

 

Let me remind you that I am FOR vouchers.

 

But I do understand the position of what I described above.

 

Urban areas, large school districts like a Jefferson County, can do that presently with open enrollment in the district and not have to worry about vouchers.

 

I don't think it will come to pass because the government is going to want some governmental agency to be responsible for that child's education and they do that by making the home school district responsible.

 

The other way turns the responsibility over to the parent, where it should be in my opinion, but besides jail how are you going to hold the parent accountable if they don't do a good job getting their child an education?

 

Presently, the district is responsible and they threaten with "distinguished educators" to come in and take over the district/school.

[Clyde]

As usual with education discussions, you are right and you are wrong because you are looking through it as it affects urban schools.

 

How would it help a parent who lives in a rural county whose district has one elementary school, one middle school and/or one high school.

 

They could move to a different country as it is now and have their kids attend a different school without a voucher.

 

That would fall into the "too bad" category unfortunately. If you can improve the overall product (in this case education) you can't NOT do it because SOME will not be able to participate.

[ladiesbballcoach]

That would fall into the "too bad" category unfortunately. If you can improve the overall product (in this case education) you can't NOT do it because SOME will not be able to participate.

 

I do not know what you mean by the bolded.

[Clyde]

I do not know what you mean by the bolded.

 

Lets say there is a vouchers program that both sides agree has many, many benefits. We're all behind it because it will help the overall education system in this country which will directly benefit all of us. However, this plan , while being an option for a large number of students, is not a real option for folks in rural areas.

 

Do we not implement the plan because some cannot take advantage of it even though we all agree that the country as a whole will benefit?

[ladiesbballcoach]

Lets say there is a vouchers program that both sides agree has many, many benefits. We're all behind it because it will help the overall education system in this country which will directly benefit all of us. However, this plan , while being an option for a large number of students, is not a real option for folks in rural areas.

 

Do we not implement the plan because some cannot take advantage of it even though we all agree that the country as a whole will benefit?

 

Just because a person points out a flaw in the thinking does NOT mean they are against the plan.

 

As I said, before, I AM FOR A VOUCHER SYSTEM. I WOULD VOTE FOR A VOUCHER SYSTEM.

 

But it will not solve all of the education problems in the country as some are trying to say it is a magical cure-all for education.

 

It is not. It has and would lead to a lot of issues. Some that could make school systems WORSE.

[rockmom]

That would fall into the "too bad" category unfortunately. If you can improve the overall product (in this case education) you can't NOT do it because SOME will not be able to participate.

 

Clyde, you are such a contradiction sometimes. :lol:

 

I agree with you, in this instance. The greater good should prevail.

[SilverShadow]

When the schools are pitted in competition for each other because parents have an actual voice in their child's education (like a private school) the schools will be forced to be more efficient. Whether it is cutting salaries, saving money on transportation, or who knows, competition can only foster more efficiency.

 

 

So allow me to ask this question, if a student has special needs and very specific service requirements would the private school be required/forced to provide for this student under your voucher idea?

 

Further, regarding discipline would the private school still be required to educate the student even if the student was expelled under your voucher idea?