School vouchers come in many forms, but all of them would provide parents with money to spend on the schools of their choice. We all want to provide our children with the best education possible -- but are voucher programs tools of change or misguided panaceas?
Please select the category that most closely reflects your concern about this content,
so that we can review it and determine whether it violates Civility 101 or isn't
appropriate for some other reason.
Abusing this feature is also a violation of Civility 101.
Explanation:
Biweekly updates on new debates and experts
Please check your email to confirm your subscription.
© 2008 Opposing Views, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Opposing Views, Inc. is not responsible for the content posted on this website. Please view full disclaimer under Terms
The Current Educational System Is Not Working
- From ASC
By Alliance for School Choice
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
That's like trying to fix a flat tire with a balloon animal.
The answer to fixing a broken school isn't to take money out of the school... schools are funded per student. What does this do but to increase the chance that more students will fail? School vouchers don't address the underlying problem: There isn't equal educational opportunity. Why should one school have new football uniforms every other year when another doesn't have money for books and has over-crowded classrooms? Is it any wonder that the latter would be failing while the former thrives? Education supposedly being the goal, the money that is in schools is not being equally distributed. That's the problem.
When every school has the same books, the same teacher:student ratio, and equal access to all learning materials then we will be able to see what - if anything - is wrong with the education system. Until this happens we are comparing apple pie to orange peels and telling the people with the orange peels to travel four hours by bus to get to the apple pie. Then we don't give them a fork. It would make sense to just make a pie where the people with orange peels are at.
There is absolutely no reason why we shouldn't be able to make this happen other than the red tape that government sets up itself. It shouldn't be that hard. You distribute materials according to number. The exact same materials. You hire more teachers if you need to. Expand schools if you need to. You have a state fund for education that all districts pay into and all schools in the state take out. You ensure that technology is available on an equal basis. Once this is established and has time to mature for three - five years, you'll see if there's a problem with schools or just how they're funded.
One thing, too - all schools must have equal access to art and music programs. It isn't equal opportunity for one school district to have art classes and another just auto.
- SocialistBetty
December 19, 2008 1:46AM
Reply to this Recommend (0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
I guess your name says it all
"The answer to fixing a broken school isn't to take money out of the school..."
Exactly what do vouchers have to do with taking money out of a given school?
"School vouchers don't address the underlying problem: There isn't equal educational opportunity."
They give parents and students the CHOICE of which school they want to attend, which is FAR from not given equal educational opportunity.
"Why should one school have new football uniforms every other year when another doesn't have money for books and has over-crowded classrooms?"
They shouldn't, thus vouchers allow students to avoid schools that engage in such conditions and also given schools the incentive to avoid such circumstances.
"Is it any wonder that the latter would be failing while the former thrives?"
No wonder about it at all, thus if you vouch the whole system, schools that thrive stay in business. The ones that have the best platform attract and keep the most students and thus for schools to remain around they must fulfill such an expectation.
"Education supposedly being the goal, the money that is in schools is not being equally distributed. That's the problem."
Right, the problem is schools recieve tax-funding REGARDLESS of how well they are doing with their students; a system like this doesn't NEED to improve because at the end of the day they recieve the same paycheck from the government making it pointless for teachers to go above and beyond for the same pay as an educator that sits around and does nothing.
"When every school has the same books, the same teacher:student ratio, and equal access to all learning materials then we will be able to see what - if anything - is wrong with the education system."
Don't current madates already provide for such a system in which all schools follow the same standards with the same funding with the same lack of incentive to improve?
"Until this happens we are comparing apple pie to orange peels and telling the people with the orange peels to travel four hours by bus to get to the apple pie."
Can you please ellaborate on how this analogy extends to real-life examples of failed educational institutions?
"Then we don't give them a fork. It would make sense to just make a pie where the people with orange peels are at."
See the above point.
"There is absolutely no reason why we shouldn't be able to make this happen other than the red tape that government sets up itself."
Indeed, make the transition to privatized education systems so schools that do well get their respective amount of money proportionate to how well they deliver their service.
"It shouldn't be that hard. You distribute materials according to number. The exact same materials."
Except distributing the exaxt same materials does not take into account the fact that the SAME materials go to students with DIFFERENT needs and desires. The result is that your not accounting for the different educational skills and abilities that students in a country as diverse as ours would have to cater to.
"You hire more teachers if you need to. Expand schools if you need to."
Something that a voucher based system would account for just fine. If a school needs more teachers because of a surplus of students the increased funding they receive from the larger number of pupils would allow them to make such adjustments. The same applies to expanding the school as a whole.
"You have a state fund for education that all districts pay into and all schools in the state take out."
Hold on, so districts pay into a fund and the schools within those districts take the money out, where does the money the districts have in the first place come from?
"You ensure that technology is available on an equal basis. Once this is established and has time to mature for three - five years, you'll see if there's a problem with schools or just how they're funded."
Techonoly and funding are next to irrelavent when it comes to the status of their students learning ability.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bx4pN-aiofw
"One thing, too - all schools must have equal access to art and music programs. It isn't equal opportunity for one school district to have art classes and another just auto."
With a voucher system students can CHOOSE which schools they feel best deliver what it is they are looking for. If one student is more inclined for mechanic abilities, but has no taste in art, then why does it matter if a school he/she goes to has no art program?
- F2XL
December 19, 2008 8:45PM
Reply to this Recommend (0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
A Ron Paul supporter semi-socialist... weird, I know.
"Why should one school have new football uniforms every other year when another doesn't have money for books and has over-crowded classrooms?"
They shouldn't, thus vouchers allow students to avoid schools that engage in such conditions and also given schools the incentive to avoid such circumstances.
"Is it any wonder that the latter would be failing while the former thrives?"
No wonder about it at all, thus if you vouch the whole system, schools that thrive stay in business. The ones that have the best platform attract and keep the most students and thus for schools to remain around they must fulfill such an expectation.
___________________
Vouchers allow students to avoid schools that "engage in such conditions"? Those conditions are a result of inequality. Shuffling students to another school that has more money doesn't fix the problem of inequality. It simply ignores the problem. That's the point. There isn't a"best platform". Curriculum is standard and is standard nation-wide. That's how you've reached the conclusion that one school is failing - by the school not living up test scores. How can the school that has 12 year old text books perform at the same standard that the school that can not only provide the textbooks but additional materials? It doesn't. School vouchers will not fix this problem because it isn't the school that is broken.
Vouching the whole system is ridiculous. How can a school thrive if it lacks what "thriving" schools have? You're not addressing the underlying cause, you're simply addressing the symptom. Addressing, might I add, in a way that will create severe and debilitating side effects.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"When every school has the same books, the same teacher:student ratio, and equal access to all learning materials then we will be able to see what - if anything - is wrong with the education system."
Don't current madates already provide for such a system in which all schools follow the same standards with the same funding with the same lack of incentive to improve?
________________
Current mandates (which you seem to be against since they don't address the differing abilities of students) do not provide this. There is a standard curriculum (again, you should be against even this because of the fact that the SAME materials apply to students with DIFFERENT needs and desires.). The funding is different depending on the district. Example? I live in Michigan - specifically, the lower upper northwest (upper side of the lower penninsula). Student funding here is approx. $6,400. Per student funding for schools in the Detroit area? Approx $8,200. Personal example: I went through bio with a book I couldn't take home (because there weren't enough of them) that was also from 1982. School vouchers were just making their debut in this state around the same time I entered my junior year. What would have happened if the voucher system had passed? Nothing. It would have fixed nothing. The inequality would have remained. Unless you're suggesting that a four hour bus ride (one way) is acceptable since students are bussed for hours under current voucher systems in other states?
You're implying that there is no wish to improve, let alone that vouchers would supply incentive. As if schools and the teachers in them only care about students if there is money involved.... because that Must be why people are teachers - that huge $60,000 a year (after 5 years. IF you're lucky). That must also be why most teachers will buy school supplies with their own money; because they do not care if their students thrive and succeed.
~~~~~~~~~~~
- SocialistBetty
December 20, 2008 10:02PM
Reply to this Recommend (0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Reply on vouchers (part 1)
I don't know if you're saying I'm a semi-socialist, or if you're a Ron Paul supporter, but if you're stating the former, my view is that vouchers are an interim step to complete separation of education and state.
Secondly: Please quote my text and my text only!
It's very annoying to have to sort through word salads in which you quote both yours and my words. Do what I do if you quote people, just quote the phrases I say and nothing else. It doesn't add to the debate if I have to sort through crap most of the time instead of adding to the discussion.
Anyways....
"Vouchers allow students to avoid schools that "engage in such conditions"? Those conditions are a result of inequality."
No doubt about it, a student can choose to leave a school that doesn't live up to their expectations. And of course the conditions are the result of inequality just as much as a physical fire is the result of heat.
"Shuffling students to another school that has more money doesn't fix the problem of inequality. It simply ignores the problem. That's the point."
If your complaint is that not a single school should "fail" then I honestly can't help you. Students should not have to put up with unequal conditions, thus far a school which has such conditions would lose students since they aren't providing well for their customers. Plain and simple, if a school is doing poorly they can either shape up, or ship out.
"There isn't a"best platform". Curriculum is standard and is standard nation-wide."
Exactly, vouchers allow students to CHOOSE different platforms in the first place. Having the same nation-wide curriculum does not take into account the fact that students are all different in their abilities.
"That's how you've reached the conclusion that one school is failing - by the school not living up test scores."
I'm not sure what your saying here, but I've never made the claim that any particular school is failing today. I stated that under a voucher system, it's possible to keep the schools that do well, and scrap the ones that are wasting people's time.
"How can the school that has 12 year old text books perform at the same standard that the school that can not only provide the textbooks but additional materials? It doesn't. School vouchers will not fix this problem because it isn't the school that is broken."
Of a school which isn't keeping up will lose out. That's the whole point of vouchers, the school IS broken in the sense that it isn't keeping up with student and societal needs, so students have the choice to spend their vouchers and their effort on a school that DOES provide for them.
Nonetheless, define a broken school.
"Vouching the whole system is ridiculous. How can a school thrive if it lacks what "thriving" schools have?"
It won't, thus it will lose students (and thus money) and will be forced to either shape up, or close up. The schools that DO thrive will receive the most students since they are obviously running the right kind of school. In the end existing schools improve (if they want to exist at all), and students have a wider level of options along with better services.
"You're not addressing the underlying cause, you're simply addressing the symptom. Addressing, might I add, in a way that will create severe and debilitating side effects."
The cause is lack of incentive to improve (since they get tax money regardless of what they do). The solution is giving the incentive to improve by having BETTER schools receive MORE money. Distribution of money will be determined by student choice, not bureaucracy.
Enlighten me on those side-effects if you can.
- F2XL
December 21, 2008 3:40PM
Reply to this Recommend (0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Continued from first reply on vouchers
Anyways, I agree that the standard curriculum system needs to be abolished, but as for the following:
"The funding is different depending on the district. Example? I live in Michigan - specifically, the lower upper northwest (upper side of the lower penninsula). Student funding here is approx. $6,400. Per student funding for schools in the Detroit area? Approx $8,200."
With a voucher based system every student can be guaranteed the same amount of money to use throughout their K-12 lifetime (I think at least five grand per student should do; $5,000.00 is more than what most typical private school education tuitions would look like).
"Personal example: I went through bio with a book I couldn't take home (because there weren't enough of them) that was also from 1982."
Right, and keep in mind that this was under government bureaucracy.
"School vouchers were just making their debut in this state around the same time I entered my junior year. What would have happened if the voucher system had passed? Nothing. It would have fixed nothing."
That's a big claim to leave unfounded, if they passed then schools would've HAD to improve if they wanted to keep their students. It's no different then various car manufacturers aiming for the most state of the art designs in order to please their customers.
"The inequality would have remained."
If a school had the choice of either buying new books and use existing materials more efficiently, or going out of business, which do you think they would've aimed for???
"Unless you're suggesting that a four hour bus ride (one way) is acceptable since students are bussed for hours under current voucher systems in other states?"
That's their choice, vouchers can just as easily apply to online options as well. Overtime new schools can emerge, and unless this is a rural area you're talking about I highly doubt a 4-hour bus ride is something they would need to endure. In the city I live in you can drive for any more than 30 minutes without coming within range of a high school. There are a total of over five high schools in the district I live in alone, and I would like a reference to the claim that under current voucher states, students must face hours of bussing per day to get to school.
"You're implying that there is no wish to improve, let alone that vouchers would supply incentive."
Yeah, I guess that pretty much sums it up. Generally speaking though, because of course teachers care for students. The problem is that they don't get additional compensation for doing well as teachers and as a school.
"As if schools and the teachers in them only care about students if there is money involved.... because that Must be why people are teachers - that huge $60,000 a year (after 5 years. IF you're lucky)."
No kidding, they are payed over $45/hr, and still bitch about not getting payed as much as they should. At that rate, I might consider becoming a teacher for salary alone. Not to mention meeting a whole array of students.
"That must also be why most teachers will buy school supplies with their own money; because they do not care if their students thrive and succeed."
By all means, they do care for their students. However, as with the teacher pay (see above point), the problem has virtually NOTHING to do with money. See the next comment.
- F2XL
December 21, 2008 3:41PM
Reply to this Recommend (0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
You gotta blend.
"It shouldn't be that hard. You distribute materials according to number. The exact same materials."
Except distributing the exaxt same materials does not take into account the fact that the SAME materials go to students with DIFFERENT needs and desires. The result is that your not accounting for the different educational skills and abilities that students in a country as diverse as ours would have to cater to.
_____
Except that the reason schools are supposedly failing is that the exact SAME testing standards apply to students with DIFFERENT needs and desires. Except that the reason schools are "failing" is because they have to try and work within the same framework with LESS money than schools that are NOT failing. Higher student to teacher ratios. Older materials. Lack of materials. These things are important.
You're mistaking my words to mean that all students should take calculus even if they have the capabilities of a Forest Gump. Or that all students should start with remedial math when they clearly have the capabilities of a ....math genius (I know what you're thinking). Within all schools, all gifted programs should have access to the same materials. Within all schools, the special needs programs have access to everything there is. Private tutors should be available in All schools. Not just schools that have more funding. All students should thrive... not just students in schools with better funding. All students. Where they live. Without having to be bussed forty miles for somthing that they should have equal access to. Aaaaaand that would be an education.
~~~~~~~~~~~
Techonoly and funding are next to irrelavent when it comes to the status of their students learning ability.
_____
http://www.edtechactionnetwork.org/student_achieve.html
http://www.ed.gov/pubs/EdReformStudies/EdTech/reasons.html
~~~~
That's a great youtube link to 20/20 airing.
I'd like to address a few things, though.
First, the choice that Belgium schools offer pretty much says they are pandering to parents; that's why they have to offer things such as cooking classes, and basketball. How is learning how to make a great soufle going to teach a child the purpose of the Bill of Rights? Or why the Bill of Rights is important? It won't. Those things may interest a child, but if the problem with our schools is that students aren't learning the basics cooking won't help. It may help with fractions though, I'll give you that.
The fact that the better schools offer such things and attract the students says nothing. It only proves my point.
Which, by the way, is not that schools need MORE money...I think there's enough money already in the system... but that the money needs to be distributed equally. There should be not be schools with old books and crowded classrooms when other schools have new books, new computers, and lower s/t ratios. AND a cooking class AND class trips, etcetera.
Once this is addressed... once all schools will give students and equal opportunity to learn..... it's only then you can see where the problem with the education system is and will be better able to address it. Vouchers will not take care of the underlying problem.
But.
There's always a but where there's a head, right?
With that being said... Perhaps vouchers could be used by schools, not students. I mean, I get it. Cooking classes interest some students. Problem is, most schools don't offer cooking classes because interest is lower than, say, basketball. Perhaps the school could get someone to teach a cooking class for a period. Interest in school Is more than getting a grade. But why should students have to travel great lengths to get something that they should already have?
If you showed me two schools that were equal in terms of what they could offer the students and one school still wasn't performing, then I would say "Yes, shut it down and ship them out." Unfortunately, that rarely happens.
Equal footing, then take another look to see what the real problem is.
- SocialistBetty
December 20, 2008 10:03PM
Reply to this Recommend (0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
What vouchers do (continued)
"Which, by the way, is not that schools need MORE money...I think there's enough money already in the system... but that the money needs to be distributed equally."
You already brought this same point up before, and my response is the same: under a voucher system, money and resources are distributed equally based on how many students attend a given school. Sounds perfectly reasonable to me, do you beg to differ?
"There should be not be schools with old books and crowded classrooms when other schools have new books, new computers, and lower s/t ratios. AND a cooking class AND class trips, etcetera."
I agree, schools need to improve. By a whole lot. See the above point.
"Once this is addressed... once all schools will give students and equal opportunity to learn..... it's only then you can see where the problem with the education system is and will be better able to address it."
Which is what vouchers do since students will receive the same amount money in a voucher that they carry with them their entire K-12 academic life until they are out of high school.
"Vouchers will not take care of the underlying problem."
See the above point and please explain to me what this problem is that vouchers are supposedly futile to solve.
"With that being said... Perhaps vouchers could be used by schools, not students."
You mean like the current system today?
"I mean, I get it. Cooking classes interest some students. Problem is, most schools don't offer cooking classes because interest is lower than, say, basketball."
Right, student interest (cough: supply and demand) should determine whether or not an elective class persists. Not government bureaucracy.
"Perhaps the school could get someone to teach a cooking class for a period. Interest in school Is more than getting a grade. But why should students have to travel great lengths to get something that they should already have?"
No they shouldn't. Under voucher systems schools must keep up with student and parent desires if they want to remain as a school at all.
"If you showed me two schools that were equal in terms of what they could offer the students and one school still wasn't performing, then I would say "Yes, shut it down and ship them out." Unfortunately, that rarely happens."
I just gave you links above that show private schools do better with LESS money in the first place.
Does that change your view at all???
"Equal footing, then take another look to see what the real problem is."
I agree. Let all students have the same choice and opportunity regardless of income (for now) and then once we see students have the same money available, people may decide afterwords whether we should move on and completely separate school and state altogether with complete privatization or if we should go back to the original system.
- F2XL
December 21, 2008 4:54PM
Reply to this Recommend (0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
On a completey different note....
This is interesting:
"The August 2001 Gallup Poll for Phi Delta Kappan magazine found that "When given the specific choice, 71 percent of the general public would improve and strengthen existing public schools while just 27 percent would opt for vouchers, the alternative most frequently mentioned by public school critics." ( http://www.pdkintl.org/kappan/k0109gal.htm )"
Interesting because parents can make the choice to improve and strengthen existing public schools simply by involving themselves NOW, regardless of a voucher system or the lack thereof. So, if parents are so involved and concerned about their child's education, one wouldn't think there would be a need for any school to be failing.
- SocialistBetty
December 20, 2008 10:45PM
Reply to this Recommend (0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
If a million people believe in a dumb idea..................
" http://www.pdkintl.org/kappan/k0109gal.htm "
........then it's still a dumb idea
- F2XL
December 21, 2008 4:55PM
Reply to this Recommend (0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.