Who are the deserving poor?

[Sixtus]

I would add: 'Wherever there is a need and I am able to fulfill it

 

[vern_humphrey]

OK, So I am a teacher and I find that “in my opinion” some of your opinions are not quite valid.

So you say the national high school non-completion rate is substantially lower than 28-30% ? And that **none **of our current high school kids are functionally illiterate?

First, let’s talk about Head Start: On going survey: www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/opre/hs/impact_study/index.html this web site has a survey that started in 2003 and runs through 2009, with the improvements that have been made in education. Another web site is: www.highscope.org/Content.asp?ContentId=260 Here they compare those poor children who went to Head Start vs those who did not, or had other care. It shows how far they came from 4-5 year olds, how they stayed with their peers as OPPOSED to those with NO Head Start. It also discusses the absentee father, who makes a difference. You will find that they also discuss how much parental involvement goes on and how that affects the DROP OUT rate.

So an uncompleted study is what you want to hang your hat on?

or::

Into Adulthood: A Study of the Effects of ► Principal investigator Sherri Oden noted, “These findings confirm that Head Start programs can have important long-term effects on the lives of the children they serve.”
Head Start,
by Sherri Oden, Lawrence Schweinhart, and David Weikart with Sue Marcus and Yu Xie (2000), presents encouraging findings from a 17-year follow-up study of 622 young adults 22 years old in Colorado and Florida, who were born in poverty and did or did not attend Head Start as young children. The researchers located and interviewed 77 percent of the original sample of children

If its working, it ought to be working across the board, not just in a sample of “622 young adults 22 years old in Colorado and Florida.” The high school completion rate ought to be much higher than the current 70-72%.

As for funding, schools cannot operate without it,

I leave that statement as I found it – breathtaking.

and I live in one of the states that spends the least per capita and also live in a low-socioeconic, rural area. We depend upon funding to get the basics just to teach. I will tell you that I personally spend between $2,000 - $6,000 a year (that I keep records on). The needs that I provide for individual “needy poor students” I do NOT claim, I just feel that is my Christian duty.

What is this “funding?” Are you saying no public money is spent on schools? Obviously not – clearly schools are funded.

But the money is spent inefficiently.

Here is a website that is not antiquated about funding the education system in the US.
www.npr.org/programs/specials/polleducation/education.front.html

I get “page not found” on that National Public Radio site.

And I point out if you have a study – not some reporter’s piece, but a valid peer-reviewed study – that shows a positive correlation between dollars spent and quality of education, I would love to see it.

As a first grade teacher, I can tell the poor children who had the opportunity to go to Head Start, vs those needy children who did not. The ones who went to Head Start have been given the advantage to be on level with their peers. Those who did not get a lot of remediation, but have a difficult time catching up for any number of reasons.

And how does that translate into a higher high-school graduation rate?

No one denies there is a benefit in the early school years from Head Start – but the benefit is dissipated before the children reach Middle School. And the high school dropout rate remains at 28-30%.

I think the important thing is to remember that the children NEED QUALITY education,

I think the important thing is to remember that the children NEED QUALITY education, and they aren’t getting it.

 

[vern_humphrey]

(Continued from previous post)

and that starts at home. If they do not get it at home, then the teacher becomes teacher, mom, dad, social worker and police officer. You tell me, that I am not doing my job, when I take students who do NOT recognize letters or sounds and teach them to read. You tell me, that I am not doing my job, when I get a child who doesn’t know his colors, but by the end of the year reads the words without thought. You tell me, that I am not doing my job when I take students who have no clue how to count and teach them to add/subtract and regroup.

Nobody tells you you aren’t doing your job – but you illustrate the problem. You identify with the school system. You take any criticism of the system as criticism of yourself.

And you therefore reject valid criticism.

The first step in solving a problem is to admit you have a problem. But you won’t do that – because you take criticism personally.

Think about what you are saying and realize that you can NOT make BLANKET statements in education. There are too many variables, and they are NOT all the teachers fault, she/he just gets blamed for them.

Once again, you take criticism of the system personally – which keeps you from seeing and addressing the problems.

Now I am not trying to hurt your feelings, I just want you to be aware, that for every study done out there, there is another just the opposite.

You have not yet shown that.

Yes, there are knee-jerk defenses of the system But there are no valid peer-reviewed studies that show a correlation between dollars spent and quality of education.

And no study has made the 28-30% high school dropout rate go away.

Not all teachers are lazy, and many have more jobs than you can fulfill in a lifetime. This is a high stress job, because you want the best for your students and sometimes YOU are the ONLY ONE who wants that, because the parents think of us as baby sitters.

When you start blaming the parents, you begin to say, “I can’t do my job because of them.” And accepting money for a job you know you can’t do is wrong.

About the drop out rate, I take that into consideration from day one. I know that if a child leaves my room and cannot read, write and do math at least on level with the average student, his/her chance of being a drop out comes into play.

And yet you try to put up a smokescreen to tell us that Head Start works, and all is wonderful – all the while knowing that dropout rate is there and isn’t getting better.

Am I the ONLY one responsible for that, NO. The parent who will not or cannot help their child has a part in that, and all of those parents who put athletics ahead of education are also to blame.

As I said, all these excuses lead to the conclusion that you are accepting money for a job you know you can’t do.

These children are the DESERVING POOR!!!

Yes, they are – and they deserve a quality education. But they won’t get it when educators take criticism personally, refuse to accept valid criticism of the system, make excuses, and try put the blame everywhere but on the system.

We need to realize this, and work toward helping them become better educated, so that they do not live in poverty forever.

Yes, we do – but how can we do it when any criticism of the system is seem by the teachers to be an attack on themselves, personally? How can we do it when any exploration of the problems become a new round of the blame-game, with educators pointing fingers everywhere but at the system that was created to educate the children?

Anyone can volunteer at a school, to help read with students, to be a mentor (of course you have to have a background check), but here is a way for everyone to help and it would only cost them about 30 minutes a week. Think about that. I am here for the children!!!

I do – in fact, I volunteer with reading (including an adult reading program). I tutor high school kids in math. I tutor students in nursing programs in math.

I was there for my own and still am, but I am here for those I teach. They are my priority in life, and I will do what I must to help them. Think about me and know that there are teachers like me in your school system, in your state and then decide the tax money is not necessary. If you still feel that way, donate your time, I guarantee you will not be turned away.

Think about the 28-30% of children who don’t graduate from high school – and think about how we can help them.

And the first step is to face criticism squarely, not try to deflect it

 

[scarlet405]

Vern Humphrey #202

You state REPEATEDLY, that I cannot accept critism, but you do not know me and yet you criticize me. I can accept such and do on a daily basis, from people like you, parents, collegues, the school system, the state and the federal government. I am not alone in this all teachers are subject to the same criteria. You know I do not even know your occupation yet if I made some of the statements about your “kind of worker”, in blanket form, I believe you would be a little out of sorts also. In each profession you are able to find people who excel at their job and those who are there for a paycheck.

You want statistics, and you want to blanket them across the board and that is not always possible, but here are websites that may help with regard to reading:
fcrr.org/fcrrreports/PDF/Read_Well_Report.pdf
store.cambiumlearning.com/Resources/Research/pdf/sw_Research_ReadWell_RB01.pdf
dibels.uoregon.edu/
alsde.edu/

Now each school inside each school system is different. There are NO laws governing what materials can be used to teach: example: we are required to have in place a remediation program that must be utilized each day. We have to spend a total of 3 hours per day on reading. This is MY school system. We follow the guidelines for NCLB and the Alabama Reading Initiative as well as the Alabama Math Initiative.

I have also included a website on DIBELS, to give you an idea of how standardized testing is done in K-3 as well as SAT for 3rd graders and up.

I have enclosed a copy of the Alabama Education Website link. Here you can find ALL of the testing that has been done, how each school ranked, those who did not meet AYP, and those who did. The drop out rate is on there as well.

You keep talking about the high rate of drop outs and stating the statistics for this problem, but do you not agree (at least a little) that if these students had a better start the drop out rate would lower. It is something each teacher at each school and on every level is aware of. It is our goal to decrease this, we do not want to see children fail, we want to see them SUCEED.

dropoutprevention.org/ndpcdefault.htm
nces.ed.gov/pubs2007/dropout05/NationalEventDropout.asp

Read these two studies, and you tell me where you get that the system is FAILING. The government study done as recently as 2004-2005 has the drop out rate at 4 - 5 % NATIONALLY. Now that rate is lower than it is here in AL, but it is a National Average. If you will read the first article, it will tell you the primary cause of drop outs is home or family life, not a failure of the system.

As I have said (although you want to argue with me), you can find studies to indicate ANYTHING you want. This forum is NOT about decreasing the drop out rate. THIS THREAD IS ABOUT “WHO ARE THE DESERVING POOR?” That is all I have been trying to state is that the CHILDREN are the deserving poor. Now you think about some of this stuff, but think about what the forum is about and get off the drop out rate, it has nothing to do with who the “deserving poor” are, unless you can prove that to me. I know students who did NOT come from poor families, but dropped out to start to work in the family business, they are NOT part of the deserving poor, despite their drop out status.

 

[scarlet405]

Vern Humphrey #202

If you want a thread about the drop out rate, maybe you should start one and then we might be able to get on the same page. Remember I told you this is about “THE DESERVING POOR”.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Vern Humphrey #202

If you want a thread about the drop out rate, maybe you should start one and then we might be able to get on the same page. Remember I told you this is about “THE DESERVING POOR”.

So those who drop out, although most are condemned to be poor, are not the deserving poor?

 

[vern_humphrey]

Vern Humphrey #202

You state REPEATEDLY, that I cannot accept critism, but you do not know me and yet you criticize me.

You are a teacher, are you not? Presumably, you are therefore able to express yourself in writing.

When I read what you wrote, I see you wandering off the subjet (Who are the deserving poor?) in a defense of a system that has failed the poor.

 

[scarlet405]

So those who drop out, although most are condemned to be poor, are not the deserving poor?

Where does it site that the state of being poor increases the drop out rate anymore than absentee parenting?

 

[scarlet405]

You are a teacher, are you not? Presumably, you are therefore able to express yourself in writing.

When I read what you wrote, I see you wandering off the subjet (Who are the deserving poor?) in a defense of a system that has failed the poor.

I defend a system that has been dumped on by society to care for the very youngest of the poor, if that is being a teacher, so be it.

This is not anymore wandering off the subject than you with your “drop out” rate. I didn’t see anywhere that you proved being poor is the cause of the drop out rate. My understanding of what you wrote was that you blamed the system and the teachers, not the fact that the students were poor.

 

[scarlet405]

If I am mistaken, please prove what you are stating.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Where does it site that the state of being poor increases the drop out rate anymore than absentee parenting?

I’m not sure I understand the question.

But I’ll answer the question I think you asked. Dropping out of high school (which is, I think we can agree, a choice) dramatically increases the chances of being poor.

infoplease.com/ipa/A0883617.html

The table is difficult to reproduce in this medium, but in 2004, men without a high school diploma had a median income of $26,277. Men with a GED made $35,725. And highschool graduates made $41,895…

Now an alternate translation of you question would be that you accuse these hardworking women of “absentee parenting.” That’s both unChristian and untrue.

 

[vern_humphrey]

I defend a system that has been dumped on by society to care for the very youngest of the poor, if that is being a teacher, so be it.

It isn’t – it’s being an apologist.

This is not anymore wandering off the subject than you with your “drop out” rate. I didn’t see anywhere that you proved being poor is the cause of the drop out rate.

Are you serious?

Being a dropout is a cause of being poor.

Do you deny that?

My understanding of what you wrote was that you blamed the system and the teachers, not the fact that the students were poor.

I can (and have) objectively shown the system is failing – the dropout rate alone is enough to prove that.

I suggest education would be better off if educators would disentangle their personalities from their jobs, so they could objectively address the problems.

 

[scarlet405]

I’d like to meet that HS Grad that makes $41,000+, with a college degree I don’t make that. The people you are talking about CHOOSE to drop out of school and suffer the consequences, they are not in my opinion deserving poor, however their children are.

When I speak of absentee parenting, I am talking about the parent who is not available on ANY level for their child. These are the students at the highest risk, because they get no moral support, no one to check up on HW, no one to even see that they attend school, they really have no one or no place to turn, these are deserving poor. They deserve our best.

On the other side, and at the same time the same side is the parent who is “physically” there, but puts NO emphasis on education and does nothing to help in the cause of their child being educated. This parent may or may not be poor. They are only concerned with the fact that the child is not at home (freedom for the parent). These same parents care a great deal about sports, extra curricular, school (education) is just an inconvenience they have to deal with.

Although we are disagreeing, I think on some level we have the same idea in mind, with just a few tweeks. I am thinking more along the very poor young child (a child who truly has no one). You are speaking of a teenager, and it is my wish (I know this is not always possible) that if we do everything right with the young child, he/she will not drop out of school and can go on to further the educational level.

Does this make sense to you? Do you think we can come to some sort of agreement?

I just read your new post. Do you really want someone who is “disentangled” as you put it, to teach your child. Don’t you want someone who cares about your child and whether or not he/she learns? Don’t you want a teacher that will go the extra mile to help those who need help, be it academic or financial?

 

[vern_humphrey]

I’d like to meet that HS Grad that makes $41,000+, with a college degree I don’t make that.

The cite I gave you has the following note at the bottom of the page:

Source: U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, Current Population Reports, Series P-60, “Money Income of Households, Families, and Persons in the United States,” “Income, Poverty, and Valuation of Noncash Benefits,” various years; and Series P-60, “Money Income in the United States,” various years. From Digest of Education Statistics 2005.

You should direct any questions to the US Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census.

You should note that the data I gave you was for men. Women make considerably less – on the order of $5,000 to $10,000 a year less.

The people you are talking about CHOOSE to drop out of school and suffer the consequences, they are not in my opinion deserving poor, however their children are.

You know, that was the very first question I asked you!

When I speak of absentee parenting, I am talking about the parent who is not available on ANY level for their child.

And the people we have been discussing – mothers taking nursing courses – certainly don’t fall into that category.

These are the students at the highest risk, because they get no moral support, no one to check up on HW, no one to even see that they attend school, they really have no one or no place to turn, these are deserving poor. They deserve our best.

I would agree with you that an orphan living on the street needs our help.

I would disagree that a child whose parent(s) is trying to improve her education falls into the category of “absentee parent.”

On the other side, and at the same time the same side is the parent who is “physically” there, but puts NO emphasis on education and does nothing to help in the cause of their child being educated.

Which is certainly not the case with the ladies we are discussing. In fact, the example they set is itself an act of parenting – and instills in the child by example the value of educaiton and hard work.

This parent may or may not be poor. They are only concerned with the fact that the child is not at home (freedom for the parent). These same parents care a great deal about sports, extra curricular, school (education) is just an inconvenience they have to deal with.

Which is not the case with the ladies we are discussing.

Although we are disagreeing, I think on some level we have the same idea in mind, with just a few tweeks. I am thinking more along the very poor young child (a child who truly has no one). You are speaking of a teenager, and it is my wish (I know this is not always possible) that if we do everything right with the young child, he/she will not drop out of school and can go on to further the educational level.

I’m speaking of any child, at any age.

In the case of the ladies we are discussing, they have children ranging from toddlers to teenagers.

Does this make sense to you? Do you think we can come to some sort of agreement?

I would hope so. My positioin is based on three points:

1. Every child has a right to a first-class, world quality education, including the values and attitudes that lead to success in later life.
2. A huge number of children aren’t getting such an education.
3. We need to change that.

I just read your new post. Do you really want someone who is “disentangled” as you put it, to teach your child.

Absolutely!!

I want a professional, not a person overcome with emotion and unable to objectively deal with problems.

Don’t you want someone who cares about your child and whether or not he/she learns?

“Caring” is a word with many definitions. When it comes to education, I want results, and the emotional involvement of the teacher is immaterial.

Don’t you want a teacher that will go the extra mile to help those who need help, be it academic or financial?

Sure – but I want that help to work.

 

[scarlet405]

I hope you agree with this… I think basically we want the same things. The best education money can buy, plus a teacher who will go the extra mile to insure that our children are successful. An emotional attachment with the very young children is not necessarily a drawback, as there are so many similarities between being a mother/father and being a teacher. Example being that we are both nurturers.

Now having said that, I feel that we both want what is best for the children, and that we need to go the extra mile to make sure that the poor children have the same chance to succeed as the not poor children.

Do you agree with this?

The question is how? I know that government programs are successful, ex. Head Start, while others are not quite so sucessful. Then end result in my opinion is that teachers must max out there capabilities to teach all students, so that all are successful.

Sorry, I have to run, a former student was killed in Iraq and is receiving a posthumus Congretional Medal of Honor today and I have been invited.

Later

 

[vern_humphrey]

I hope you agree with this… I think basically we want the same things. The best education money can buy, plus a teacher who will go the extra mile to insure that our children are successful.

A good teacher is definitely an asset – but there is no evidence you can buy an education. It isn’t a problem that can be solved by throwing money at it.

An emotional attachment with the very young children is not necessarily a drawback, as there are so many similarities between being a mother/father and being a teacher. Example being that we are both nurturers.

It is one thing to be emotionally attached to the children, another thing entirely to be emotionally attached to oneself. The latter case leads to rejection of legitimate criticism and objective analysis of problems.

Now having said that, I feel that we both want what is best for the children, and that we need to go the extra mile to make sure that the poor children have the same chance to succeed as the not poor children.

Do you agree with this?

Yes, but it will take more than a mile to fix our education system.

The question is how? I know that government programs are successful, ex. Head Start, while others are not quite so sucessful. Then end result in my opinion is that teachers must max out there capabilities to teach all students, so that all are successful.

I suggest a system where parents choose the school – any school – and let competition weed out the bad schools, while the good ones prosper.

Sorry, I have to run, a former student was killed in Iraq and is receiving a posthumus Congretional Medal of Honor today and I have been invited.

Later

I salute him.

 

[whatevergirl]

I’d like to meet that HS Grad that makes $41,000+, with a college degree I don’t make that. The people you are talking about CHOOSE to drop out of school and suffer the consequences, they are not in my opinion deserving poor, however their children are.

When I speak of absentee parenting, I am talking about the parent who is not available on ANY level for their child. These are the students at the highest risk, because they get no moral support, no one to check up on HW, no one to even see that they attend school, they really have no one or no place to turn, these are deserving poor. They deserve our best.

On the other side, and at the same time the same side is the parent who is “physically” there, but puts NO emphasis on education and does nothing to help in the cause of their child being educated. This parent may or may not be poor. They are only concerned with the fact that the child is not at home (freedom for the parent). These same parents care a great deal about sports, extra curricular, school (education) is just an inconvenience they have to deal with.

Although we are disagreeing, I think on some level we have the same idea in mind, with just a few tweeks. I am thinking more along the very poor young child (a child who truly has no one). You are speaking of a teenager, and it is my wish (I know this is not always possible) that if we do everything right with the young child, he/she will not drop out of school and can go on to further the educational level.

Does this make sense to you? Do you think we can come to some sort of agreement?

I just read your new post. Do you really want someone who is “disentangled” as you put it, to teach your child. Don’t you want someone who cares about your child and whether or not he/she learns? Don’t you want a teacher that will go the extra mile to help those who need help, be it academic or financial?

It depends on the field you choose, as well. My sister didn’t go to college at all…was a stay at home for 15 years…went back to work 17 years ago, and now make over $80k per year–she worked her way up from a sales rep position in the hotel business…and now is the Director of Sales. I think that a college degree does not guarantee anything, really…and there are many people who work their ways up the ladder…and again, depending on the field you choose–you can make great money as a HS grad.

 

[scarlet405]

Vern Humphrey
First let me say thank you for the salute, I know it would have meant much to this young man. He was a wonder human being and a terrific soldier. So young…

I suggest a system where parents choose the school – any school – and let competition weed out the bad schools, while the good ones prosper.

This does sound like an ideal solution to the problem, but if you think about it with regard to the deserving poor, not quite so good. In order for parents to be able to select out of area schools, they will have to provide the transportation to get back and forth to the school. There may also be a difference in the amount of the voucher and the amount the new school expects to be paid for taking an “out of area” student. This goes on right now. There are NO laws that mandate that a student must attend the school they are assigned to based on where they live. The only rules are that you have to pay a “tuition”, which would be done away with and replaced with vouchers if parents are allowed to choose. Also, the new school does not have to and will not take on the financial burden of picking up out of area students. The cost is just to great.

So here we are again, facing the fact that those who can afford better will get better, while those who cannot will not.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Vern Humphrey
First let me say thank you for the salute, I know it would have meant much to this young man. He was a wonder human being and a terrific soldier. So young…

So are they all.

I have many friends who will forever remain in their early 20s.

Here’s to Absent Comrades…

This does sound like an ideal solution to the problem, but if you think about it with regard to the deserving poor, not quite so good. In order for parents to be able to select out of area schools, they will have to provide the transportation to get back and forth to the school. There may also be a difference in the amount of the voucher and the amount the new school expects to be paid for taking an “out of area” student.

Ah – I don’t propose a “voucher.” I propose a standard tuition – notionally 90 to 95% of the per-pupil share of the educationi budget – paid to whatever school the parents choose.

I propose opening the system to competition – there are many ways to educate children. I worked for years in the commercial education and training industry, and we used a lot of advanced methods. Right now, the best American public schools are run by DODEA – the Department of Defense Education Activity. They can deliver a course via the internet anywhere in the world – a child can be in Greenland and take a course in calculus, the child next to him taking a course in Mandarin. And nobody has to be bussed anywhere.

This goes on right now. There are NO laws that mandate that a student must attend the school they are assigned to based on where they live. The only rules are that you have to pay a “tuition”, which would be done away with and replaced with vouchers if parents are allowed to choose. Also, the new school does not have to and will not take on the financial burden of picking up out of area students. The cost is just to great.

Only in the present paradigm.

So here we are again, facing the fact that those who can afford better will get better, while those who cannot will not.

Not at all.

 

[vern_humphrey]

The Three-Paper Solution

This paper addresses the issue of education in America. It is based on four principles:

 We, the public, should pay for the education of each child in the nation.

 If we pay for a child’s education, the child should get an education – one commensurate with the amount we pay (which is to say, a world-class education).

 There should be no disparity among children, either in what we pay, or the quality education they receive.

 America works best when we have free and open competition among suppliers – and that applies to suppliers of education as much as to any other thing.

The Three-Paper Solution is a framework for applying these four principles. In practice, it is quite simple – first of all, get three sheets of blank paper:

On the first sheet: write the standards which you feel every school should meet. If you want a school to serve a hot lunch, write it down, and set standards so we can determine if the school is meeting the requirement. Similarly, if you want integrated schools, write standards for integration. Continue until you feel you have described all the standards a publicly-funded school should meet.

When writing, remember – all schools which receive public funds will have to meet your requirements, not just “public schools” and not just “private schools receiving public funds.” Schools which cannot meet your standards – whether public or private – will not be eligible to receive public funding. Also remember – these will be the only public funds the school receives.

On the second sheet: write the standards which you feel every student should meet. Specify how well children should read at the end of each grade. Set standards for electives as well as mandatory subjects – for example, if a school has a course in carpentry or automotive repair, set standards for courses in those subjects.

Write your standards as objective, measurable standards. Tell what the students must do to prove the standards have been met.

On the third sheet: list those things for which you are willing to pay extra and set a price tag beside them.

How it works: any agency or business can open a school and receive ninety percent of the per-pupil share of the state’s educational expenditures for each pupil the school attracts. This is the only source of public funding any school will receive; public, private non-profit, or private for-profit.

But won’t that drive the public schools out of business?

Only if you assume the public schools cannot compete in an open market – a market in which the same standards are applied to all schools. Schools which cannot attract enough children will go out of business – and they should go out of business. Any school – public, private non-profit, or private for-profit, which can attract enough children will have enough funding to continue operations.

Won’t poor children suffer?

No. Poor children will be better off under this plan than under the present “public school” system, because they will be able to attend any school they wish,. just as the children of more affluent parents can.

What about children trapped in a declining school as other children leave?

No one will be “trapped” in a declining school. All children will have the same opportunity to move. Children whose parents do not move them at first can be moved later, at any time – because their parents will have the same funding the other children’s parents had.

Would parents be allowed to supplement the public funds?

Of course! Look at it this way – I open a school that gets $5,000 of public funds per child (the national average is closer to twice that, but we’ll use $5,000 in this example), and the parents kick in an extra $10,000 per child. I successfully recruit nine affluent children. But in your First Sheet of paper, you said that to receive public funds I have to have at least 10% poor minority enrollment. So now I have to recruit a poor minority child, or lose $45,000 in public funding.

How do I do that if the poor parents can’t afford to pay the extra $10,000?

I give the child a $10,000 scholarship, of course – and the public funds kick in another $5,000 for that child. So for a $10,000 scholarship, I get $50,000 in public funds.

Who loses?

Not me – I qualify for $50,000 in public funds in return for a $10,000 scholarship.

Not the public – they’re paying $5,000 per child, just as they would at any other school.

Not the students – they’re attending a first-class school (and if it weren’t first class, their parents wouldn’t be willing to kick in an extra $10,000 per pupil).

Not the poor minority students – they’re getting the same first-class education and making all the connections the children of the affluent are making, and it isn’t costing them a cent.

Nobody loses, everybody wins.

(To be continued next post)