Glenn Beck, Cleon Skousen, Amerigo Vespucci, & Me

[zaffiroborant]

Right now, no matter what the parents do with their kids, they ARE supporting public education. If they don’t like what’s happening in the school system and put their kids in private school or (gasp) homeschool them, they are paying for their kid’s education TWICE.
How is that fair?

…and I too am a teacher.

My brother who has no kids pays for education anyway (through property taxes in my state) as do my neighbors son & wife they don’t want kids but have no problems supporting local schools. I have an aunt and two great aunts who never had kids yet paid for years for services they would never need. My grandfather paid for education where he lived and also on a vacation home and a business property, both in a different state. Nary a complaint from any of them for paying for something they didn’t use. They look (or looked) at it as being part of the community, and as an adult, their responsibility as a member of the community. It’s the same with a couple we get together with now and then, they have no kids (and will not) but own property (now with 2 rentals) they are fine with paying their taxes and supporting the schools without ever “getting their moneys worth”.

None of these people are (or were) concerned over fair, they accept responsibility.

 

[dianaiad]

Where are you a teacher? What grade?

I disagree with your assessment. In my classroom over the last 12 years I have observed that the majority of the time there is a recipe for success:

An active parent, parents who read with their children, parents who help their kids with their homework, parents who show up to conferences, parents who are married and not divorced ten times or shacking up, parents who keep their kids in school all day and don’t yank them out on a daily basis early because it’s convenient, parents who keep on top of their kids’ work, parents who work with teachers and actually know where the classroom is and who the teacher is, parents who don’t expose their kids to violent video games and put them to bed at 11pm each night, parents who are actually at home with their kids, etc.

You might notice the prime ingredient: parents.

<snip rest, only for space>

I teach High School English. All year.

Online. (which is why I can post here so often…one can only grade ESL efforts at finding ‘strong adjectives’ so long before one has to have a BREAK…)

As you can see, I work in a very different paradigm than you do, though I 500% agree with you regarding good parenting being THE decisive difference. That is, by the way, why I support vouchers.

I don’t quite get your claim that voucher systems privilege the wealthy…so far the few cities and states which provide voucher systems restrict them to low and middle income folk. The rich already DO send their kids to private school, as you have mentioned. If I had the money, I sure would have. As it was, I was one of those involved parents…and finally, after my youngest daughter was attacked by a student with a knife in the hall between classes (in the High School I went to), she informed me that she wasn’t going back, period. We ‘home schooled’ her last two years of high school…which, by the way, she finished in six months flat. It was the “funnest” six months I’ve spent in a very long time!

As it turns out,small voucher schools DO work…At the moment there is only one country with a nationwide voucher system; Chile. Turns out that since its inception in 1981, graduation rates have gone UP–something that the study team was actually not expecting. They, like you, went into the study figuring that the voucher system would favor the wealthy and make little difference to graduation, test scores, college attendance or income. They went into this study hoping to find the ammunition the anti-voucher folks HERE could use to defeat the whole idea.

That’s not what happened.

From this study, (the final draft…the study is VERY new…published last month) which you can find here: comes the following quote

:…the voucher reform significantly increased the demand for private subsidized schools and decreased the demand for both public and non subsidized private schools. It increased high school (grades 9-12) graduation rates by 3.6 percentage points and the percentage completing at least two years of college by 2.6 percentage points. Individuals from poor and non-poor backgrounds on average experienced similar educational attainment gains. Results also indicate that the reform modestly reduced earnings inequality and increased lifetime utility.

As to your plaint that the ‘smart kids’ would get into private schools, while the kids that fail the tests will not…I’m sorry, but that’s a good thing. I am NOT a fan of lowest common denominator education, and I teach kids with learning disabilities! They are my favorite students to teach. You see, I too am learning disabled…I am discalculaic…and was shunted by the public schools into courses that bored me silly. If I could have used vouchers and found a school that could have dealt with my issues…ah, well.

I firmly believe that a parent should be able to choose the school that best fits her child’s’ learning style; and those schools ARE out there. With vouchers, the competition will ensure that the schools out there will actually produce good education.

Regarding your comments about standards and teaching to the test…with the ‘no child left behind’ and ‘standards based teaching’ that’s PRECISELY what we are doing now! California has the CHASEE test that all high school students MUST pass before they can get a diploma, and trust me, the freshman and sophomore years are spent concentrating upon what the CHASEE will have on it. “Teaching to the test” is SOP.

…and yes, I am a fully credentialed teacher. I think voucher systems will not only help the students, they will go a very long way to returning teaching to what it should be; from teacher to student. Teachers will cease to be glorified baby sitters, and become, well…TEACHERS again. I like that idea.

 

[dianaiad]

Conservatives tend to think that de-regulating the utilities and competition will make prices go down. Funny how when they did that in California the rates went up and up. No doubt competition would do little for education.

There was a lot more to that than ‘deregulation,’ my friend. You are forgetting the very involved and combobulated deals made that ensured that California could NOT produce her own energy and had to buy it from elsewhere…other things that were royally messed up on the government level.

Deregulation had spit diddle to do with it.

It’s all about parents, teachers, administrators, and society working as a team. When the parents drop the ball and don’t care, the kids don’t care, and education as a society is not really respected, you can have all the vouchers you want and it wouldn’t matter one iota.

True, but is that a reason to keep parents who ARE concerned and active in their kid’s education from having any choices in the matter? Doesn’t that seem, well…backwards?

In California we have very very rigorous mathematics, history, science, and language arts standards. Most of the parents complain that the kids can barely handle the challenges we’re throwing at them. We spend so much time with worrying about silly state tests thanks to NCLB and other nonsense. I value public education and don’t think vouchers would do a thing except to elevate the gifted and bright, who would exceed in public anyway,

No, actually…they don’t. Or rather, they do, but in spite of, not because of. I do agree with you about 'teaching to the test." I know very few teachers who are happy with NCLB.

to private while the lowly get kept down anyway. The system has flaws, no doubt. I see them. But I blame our society and our values as a culture more. Just as I don’t blame the corrections system and police force for the out of control state of crime and delinquency as well as packed prisons. I blame society and a lack of values. I don’t blame the DMV for the myriad moronic drivers who cause wrecks and carnage, I blame the recklessness of individuals. I think vouchers is just another conservative theory with blame attached to the public employee and the public sector. It’s just like the “let’s attack pensions!” agenda they have. The only culprit in the conservative world is always the public employee.

Gurney…from where I sit it is the liberal who thinks that passing a law or increasing government control will solve the problems you list. What the voucher system will do is allow competition in education, so that excellence in teaching is rewarded, and good teachers get to, y’know, TEACH. We go to school for a very long time, we teachers, to get our credentials. Most of us go on to get MA’s and doctorates; in our local high school, nearly a quarter of the teachers have doctorate degrees. That doesn’t make them any better able to teach in this environment than the fresh faced youngster with the new preliminary credential…or worse, the intern who hasn’t finished that credential yet.

 

[LongJourney]

I also support the voucher system. People will be free to send their children to schools that respect their cultural heritages. Mormons, for example, who believe in public education, for the most part, will not feel themselves forced to impose their agenda on the public school system. Educators in Mormon-dominated areas will not have their careers ruined because of their refusal to place their toes on the Mormon party line.

 

[dianaiad]

I don’t see how it would benefit the gifted who live as paycheck to paycheck working poor or those that are poverty stricken. What incentive to these schools have to seek out children in these circumstances? And how in the world would they find them, it’s not like there is any venue for gifted kids to show their talent and they cant’ just go poking around in the student records to cull out the bright poor.

Did you read A Nation of Wimps I see vouchers benefiting the children of parents described in that book, not those I mentioned above or even lower middle class families who struggle to make ends meet.

This is where parents come in. It is the PARENT"S job to find the best school for their children, and with the voucher system, the way will be open for them to do so.

 

[dianaiad]

My brother who has no kids pays for education anyway (through property taxes in my state) as do my neighbors son & wife they don’t want kids but have no problems supporting local schools. I have an aunt and two great aunts who never had kids yet paid for years for services they would never need. My grandfather paid for education where he lived and also on a vacation home and a business property, both in a different state. Nary a complaint from any of them for paying for something they didn’t use. They look (or looked) at it as being part of the community, and as an adult, their responsibility as a member of the community. It’s the same with a couple we get together with now and then, they have no kids (and will not) but own property (now with 2 rentals) they are fine with paying their taxes and supporting the schools without ever “getting their moneys worth”.

None of these people are (or were) concerned over fair, they accept responsibility.

That is an entirely different thing. Those who are childless and pay property taxes for schools still get the benefit of those schools, in that the children who graduate from them become better able to support the society in which they live.

But parents who do that…AND have to pay again to put their own children through school have to pay twice for the same benefit.

Most toll roads charge by the vehicle; this is fine…it is the vehicle that causes the wear on the road and increases the traffic by one. I know of no toll bridge or road that charges twice if the car has children in it.

All a voucher system does is give the parent some control over how the state educates his kids.

Frankly, I’m all for that.

 

[dianaiad]

I also support the voucher system. People will be free to send their children to schools that respect their cultural heritages. Mormons, for example, who believe in public education, for the most part, will not feel themselves forced to impose their agenda on the public school system. Educators in Mormon-dominated areas will not have their careers ruined because of their refusal to place their toes on the Mormon party line.

Wow.

I am constantly amazed at the ability of some people to make EVERY possible topic a way to slam Mormonism (or any other …ism they happen to dislike…). I’ll bet you can figure out a way to blame the Mormons for the fact that the moon moves 4 centimeters further from the earth each year.

 

[LongJourney]

I’ll bet you can figure out a way to blame the Mormons for the fact that the moon moves 4 centimeters further from the earth each year.

No. That is just evidence the life on Earth will eventually end, and that all our arguments are pointless. He knows all.

Have a good day.

 

[dianaiad]

No. That is just evidence the life on Earth will eventually end, and that all our arguments are pointless. He knows all.

Have a good day.

OK, LJ, if all our arguments are pointless, then why do you do it? Your comments regarding Mormons and vouchers were so…out of left field as to BE pointless, but you seemed to think you had one.

 

[LongJourney]

Your chronic amnesia is beyond organic.

I refer you to posts in the region of 20-24 on this thread:
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=6838779#post6838779

Have a good day.

 

[zaffiroborant]

That is an entirely different thing. Those who are childless and pay property taxes for schools still get the benefit of those schools, in that the children who graduate from them become better able to support the society in which they live.

But parents who do that…AND have to pay again to put their own children through school have to pay twice for the same benefit.

Most toll roads charge by the vehicle; this is fine…it is the vehicle that causes the wear on the road and increases the traffic by one. I know of no toll bridge or road that charges twice if the car has children in it.

All a voucher system does is give the parent some control over how the state educates his kids.

Frankly, I’m all for that.

If childless people receive benefits from paying for public education then people with children get those same benefits.

 

[scipio337]

Sorry I don’t pass your litmus test and have a Sarah Palin fan club membership to satisfy your curiosity about my level of conservatism over the years. Keep in my, scipio, the great Roman general who defeated Hannibal, that I’m only 35 years old. I voted Republican since I was ever able to vote, except in this last election for the very first time. I voted for Bob Dole in my first election. I voted for Bush, Bush again, Tom Campbell for governor, Devin Nunes always for congress (one of the most hardcore conservatives on the map!), had Dr. Victor Davis Hanson as my professor and hero, and regularly watched Fox and the whole gambit of conservative books and literature.

You’re the same age as me, although I went a different route. East coast educated and liberal to start, whose views evolved over adulthood. I don’t claim to have all the answers, but I’m a learnin. Big Hanson fan, here, too.

gurneyhalleck1:

I’m simply calling it like I see it about Clinton. Did he not balance the budget? Isn’t that a matter of public record or did I hallucinate that on a Benedryl drug trip? Didn’t he leave us with a surplus? Or did I dream that one up as well? He shrunk the size of government and instituted sweeping welfare reform. Didn’t he? Pretty sure that happened…does that make me a “fan” for saying what he did that was positive? As a student of history I can easily say that Hitler cleaned up the German economy, restored pride in his people, and made Germany a world power, relevent again. Does that make me a Nazi and a Hitler fan? I’m amazed at how politically-partisan and tribal we are when a person cannot say the good in the other camp without villification and credentials being in question

I’m glad you can at least qualify it that he had a GOP Congress. He also increased taxes, gave us NAFTA, signed the Brady Bill, “Assault weapons” ban, vetoed partial birth abortion, and oh, yeah, vetoed welfare reform, before finally approving it. Twice.

Clinton had the benefit of a booming tech sector during his entire presidency. He is the only peacetime president I can think of who increased tax revenue by raising taxes.

gurneyhalleck1:

NEA members to the left of Che? I don’t know which members you know but most of the ones I know are a mixed bag. Our union president and many of our reps are Democrats but a large part of the teaching staff at my school are hardore Rush Limbaugh ditto-headed brainwashed folks who are trained to froth at the mouth at the mere mention of anything Democrat. We have some hippied-out Dems in our membership but I’d say in my town it’s about 70-30 in favor of the GOP. But keep in mind I’m in Central California, the capital of Sean Hannityville.

Do I really need to elaborate on anti-union rhetoric from the GOP? You hear it on Fox, Limbaugh, Hannity and conservative talk day in day out? I must listen to it and watch it more than you if you have missed the anti-union venom on the right. It’s as thick and annoying as the feminism abortion gay rights blather on the left!!

Sorry, I call them like I see them. I don’t work in academia, but the few teachers I know are violently opposed to any type of education reform, as you appear to be. From merit pay to vouchers, the NEA members I know seem more concerned about their own interests than their students.