Republicans & Conservatives: Archives

This is the most confusing thing I have ever read. What point are you trying to make? The title is Pro Choice, Pro Child, then you go on to discuss some school in Florida that has nothing to do with the right to life or Pro Child. Most confusing of all you go on to do a little bashing of the No Child Left Behind program. I understand your attempting to say that the lefties should be happy about stories like this, but there not. But in all honest what point were you trying to get across? The point I see is that small class sizes produce good results (I don’t know many people who disagree with that), but what does that have to do with the Pro Choice, Pro Child?

I am lost.

Conservative New York Times Columnist? And all those screaming the New York Times is the Liberal Media. Tsk, tsk….

As for this school, you failed to mention if there was any difference in the budget of the past and present.

Also. No Child Left Behind is a Republican Program.

Good test scores does not mean a child is learning. It means the scholl is good at teaching to a test.

I am lost.

Clearly. This is an article about school choice, and it’s primarily intended to direct readers to Tierney’s article. If you haven’t read that, I can understand your confusion. I hope that other readers are not experiencing similiar cognitive dislocation.

Ian:

Good test scores does not mean a child is learning. It means the scholl is good at teaching to a test.

There’s something in there for everyone. As far as I know, the research shows that test scores are the best way to level the playing field between students of different backgrounds. But even if you hate tests, the article states that the student:teacher ratio (a key liberal measure) has decreased by a whopping 27%.

Aldous -

Per-student funding is increased. As Tierney says, eachs student who leaves the school gets to take $4,400 with him as a voucher, but the residual $1,000 apparently stays with the district. So with each student who leaves, there’s actually a little bit more left with his erstwhile classmates. All this without charging taxpayers another cent! What’s more, management got medieval on the teachers and replaced half of them. Anytime you replace the bottom half of your workforce, you’re bound to improve.

Competition is efficient. This is something conservatives learn during the first week of Introduction to Economics. With liberals, this learning process seems to take rather longer, though one recent post on the left column encouraged me.

Do you have any data about the Budget of the school and which students left? If you take out the bottom of any group, it is only natural that the remaining better students would raise the average.

Also. What does this do to the profit margin of the Catholic School? How long before the Catholic School starts to suffer?

Heh. Competition is only efficient if you are going against another group. How fast do you run if you’re all alone with no one to see?

The people who teach do so because they like it not because of the money they can make. Teachers do not get rich. However, the burn-out rate of teachers is 5 years. After 5 years, many teachers become the hopeless unmotivated drones we fear. If you want to comment on this school, wait 5 years.

“How fast do you run if you’re all alone with no one to see?”

I have been running regularly for nearly thirty years. I don’t run with others. Competition against others is no longer a concern of mine. But I always start my watch to see how fast I am going. It is a reference to what I have done and what I can do. I also read stories sometimes about how fast others do their miles. What one person can do another person can do. Sometimes I raise my standard. Sometimes I realize that I am trying to do too much.

Competition, especially in education, is not only about winning and losing. It is about setting norms and standards based on real world experience. People are apt to choose the path of least resistance when they don’t know what is possible. They will easily find reasons why things can’t be done. Seeing that others have succeeded spurs greater effort or – more important – a change of method.

Competition is a lot like free speech. What is the PRACTICAL value of free speech? It is that ideas and thoughts are evaluated against each other and the better ones come to be recognized as “true”.

Chops,

Great article.

I couldn’t read the NYT article without registering(FREE on the internet= spam).
Is it a “true” voucher system or only transfer rights to another public school?

Michigan has a program called “schools of choice”, the funding is $6700 per student(more for big inner-city schools, not sure why), but its only good for another public school and they must stay within the county/district.
It works quite well except in the really large citys where their choice is; crap school x or crap school Y, and there is no transport provided in most cases.
Which still leaves the most “at risk” big city kids without the option of going to the superior private school across the road.
Its a start though.

I’ve long been an opponent of school vouchers, for many reasons. I’m happy to see that the Florida system addresses one of the biggest problems of school voucher systems, by making the vouchers only good at schools “willing to accept it as full tuition”. Without this stipulation, market forces would cause private school tuitions to raise by the amount of the voucher, thus defeating the purpose of the voucher in the first place.

Of course, this system is just begging for problems. How long will it be before the other kids at the Catholic School (who were already going there beforehand) want their $4400, too? This WILL reduce the per-student funding of the public schools.

And then, of course, there are the Separation of Church and State issues involved. Do we really want to be using public money to fund religious education?

This is a much more complex story than Tierney indicates. The state of Florida has relatively strong provisions separating church and state, so the court challenge is about the wording of constitution in relation to the voucher system.

Tierney writes, “Test scores have gone up more rapidly at schools facing the threat of vouchers than at other schools.” Yes, well, that’s because those are the schools at the very bottom of the heap. Like your typical F student, they have a lot more room to improve than your typical A student. Also, the Florida system has been around longer than the No Child system.

Check out the actual quality of Florida’s education system. It’s one of the very worst in the nation, so this voucher idea hasn’t exactly dazzled with its success. Even as the state touts vouchers, the governor keeps class sizes large, practically ensuring a lot of educational mediocrity.

Tierney also writes, “In the case being heard today at the Florida Supreme Court, they’re arguing that the program violates Florida’s version of the Blaine amendment, a prohibition on aid to religious schools that was added to many state constitutions in the 19th century thanks to campaigns by nativist politicians against the ‘Catholic menace.’”

That’s what the pro-voucher side is arguing, alright, but it’s my understanding that this is demonstrably untrue for Florida. There was never a big fear of a “Catholic menace” in the state unlike in some other regions). The court will decide the truth of this.

Having noted all this, I’d like to clarify that I’m not completely against competition in the school systems myself. I think it might even help, if done correctly. For me, the devil is in the details. I’m not so much against giving public money to good private schools or Catholic schools (as long as they don’t indoctrinate) as I am giving it to schools that are both very bad educationally and very religious ideologically. You could easily wind up funding know-nothing, anti-evolution fundamentalism. The last thing the U.S. needs is its own set of publicly funded madrassas (the breeding grounds for terrorists in Pakistan).

So any state with a voucher system needs to be careful to ensure that the kids are being educated well and that they’re not being pressured into any given religious belief.

Two more comprehensive articles on this topic can be found here at WatchBlog:

2004 Issues (Vouchers: Private vs. Public Education

and

2004 Election Issues (Schools: Local vs. National Standards)

Check out this article regarding the Milwaukee Metro area voucher system. Milwaukee was one of the original, federally waivered pilot voucher systems. The reviews, overall, have been generally good. There are lots of legal snags to get around or overcome.

There is also a great deal of antagonism regarding the teacher’s union, standardized testing, what to do with the resultant failed schools, etc.

This is not a black and white issue. There are a lot of questions that can only be answered through trial and error. I only hope the new voucher systems in other areas have learned the hard lessons learned by the Milwaukee Public School System

http://www.jsonline.com/news/editorials/feb05/300339.asp

Sorry, link inop. Try this one.

Some of the commenters here have awoken my longtime wonder at the commitment of liberals to the public education system, regardless of results. It really amazes me that student testing, teacher testing, public school choice (which, btw, is the European model), vouchers, and other reforms are usually hotly contested by those who claim to be “for the poor”. I understand the influence of the teachers’ unions, but this should affect legislators, not ideologues.

Is it the fact that liberals know they can pass on their values and beliefs through public education? That’s certainly what Reed Sanders suggests above:

Having noted all this, I’d like to clarify that I’m not completely against competition in the school systems myself. I think it might even help, if done correctly. For me, the devil is in the details. I’m not so much against giving public money to good private schools or Catholic schools (as long as they don’t indoctrinate) as I am giving it to schools that are both very bad educationally and very religious ideologically.

Yet, given a choice, he’d clearly rather have students in very bad schools than very religious schools.

Which shouldn’t surprise me. What interest does an ideologue or a politician have in other people’s kids being well-educated? Neither Reed nor I will reap a great deal of the benefits of any school reform enacted now. My response is: I know I don’t have a vested interest, so let’s put decisions in the hands of those who do have a vested interest, the parents and students themselves. Reed’s response is, apparently, somewhat different.

jimmie-
Thank you for doing your part to keep the abortion debate a rational, mature one.

Red Column-
Given that this vouchers initiative is supposed to benefit the poor and lower middle class students, I have to ask what should be the obvious question: why are we paying to subsidize another education system unaccountable to the public, rather than improving the ones that are?

I must take issue with the characterization of this vouchers initiative as being an exercize in free-market economics, because vouchers are essentially private school subsidies for institutions that knowingly priced themselves out of the market for these children. In a free market, private schools are for those who can afford it. I know this sounds elitist, but then again, isn’t that the point of the private school system, the way the folks who advocate it would have us believe? That these schools are supposed to be better than the hum-drum public schools? If there’s any point to school competition, it is between the private schools and the public.

We have a public school system because our society depends on educated workers and leadership, and cannot afford to simply draw from the ranks of private school educated children. As such, the maintenance of public school quality is also a national priority, especially in the inner cities and other poor sections of the country, because education is the most valuable resource those people will ever have, and they can’t afford to pay for the private schools.

We do not need to be subsidizing the private schools against the public, especially not where the private schools would offer scant improvement, and would take dollars away from already ailing schools. Vouchers are a diversion from the real issue: fixing our public schools, to make good public education available to us all.

I’m just a little confused by one thing:

Why are *any* private schools willing to accept these vouchers as full tuition? It seems to me that if you were sending your kids to a school that started doing that, you wouldn’t keep paying the full tuition voluntarily, you’d get the voucher as if you were going to send them to public school like all the other kids, and then move them back to the private school with the voucher serving as full tuition. Thus, reducing the funding of the private school and its effectiveness. What forces are at play to prevent this from happening, exactly?

Yet, given a choice, he’d clearly rather have students in very bad schools than very religious schools.

Chops,

You’re putting words in my mouth. I stated, “I’m not so much against giving public money to good private schools or Catholic schools (as long as they don’t indoctrinate) as I am giving it to schools that are both very bad educationally and very religious ideologically.”

That is, I object to the public funding of religious proselytizing AND I object to public funding of bad education, whether the school is public or private. That’s why I favor smart competition, as I stated above.

Neither Reed nor I will reap a great deal of the benefits of any school reform enacted now.

Actually, Chops, without going into detail, my family would benefit from vouchers becoming a permanent part of the education system. That doesn’t make them right if they’re used in the wrong way.

let’s put decisions in the hands of those who do have a vested interest, the parents and students themselves

In Florida, public schools are held to certain standards because kids have to take a standardized test called the FCAT. The private schools are not required to take that test, though they do have to provide some standardized testing. Still, the state doesn’t withhold funds from a private school even its students perform poorly on such tests. Thus, there’s a double standard. The state will act against a public school that doesn’t work well (good) but not against a private one that doesn’t (rotten), even though they both receive tax dollars.

It’s fine for parents to have a say, but those are tax dollars we’re talking about. It’s everyone’s business. If it’s liberal to believe tax dollars should be used wisely, then I’m a flaming liberal and am proud of it.

‘And then, of course, there are the Separation of Church and State issues involved. Do we really want to be using public money to fund religious education?’

What about subsidized student loans for religious colleges?

“What about subsidized student loans for religious colleges?”

This, too, creates issues of Separation of Church and State. It’s not quite as bad, as college students have more of a choice of where to go than high school students do. But it’s still not a good idea.

What about subsidized student loans for religious colleges?

This is legitimate and important question. I think it’s one that’s going to be hashed out in the Florida decision to which Chops alludes.

My sense of it is that colleges and universities with a religious affiliation don’t usually proselytize or shape their non-religious courses (except, perhaps, in vague, values-oriented ways) to suit a religious agenda, so it’s fine to allow state funds to be distributed this way. Also, the accreditation process can be used to maintain a level of quality in these institutions.

Jarandhel - It’s easy to make sure existing private school students don’t latch on to the vouchers: make them available only to those who have spent a full year (or two, or whatever) in a failing public school. However, there’s nothing wrong with giving them vouchers as well (provided they live in a failing school district), because they’re already paying tax to support the school their kids aren’t attending.

Stephen said:

Given that this vouchers initiative is supposed to benefit the poor and lower middle class students, I have to ask what should be the obvious question: why are we paying to subsidize another education system unaccountable to the public, rather than improving the ones that are?

Because we’ve tried improving the latter for decades and ultimately we’ve failed. Don’t believe me: go into inner city schools. Look at their budgets, which have increased again and again. Look at their student:teacher ratios, which have decreased and decreased. And look at their performance, by any measure, which is too often pathetic.

I must take issue with the characterization of this vouchers initiative as being an exercize in free-market economics, because vouchers are essentially private school subsidies for institutions that knowingly priced themselves out of the market for these children. In a free market, private schools are for those who can afford it.

No, Stephen, the market failure occurs because the government is subsidizing one set of schools (those it controls), and forcing people to pay for it - even those who send their students to private schools. Education is a very expensive commodity, and I agree that the state should finance it. However, to be fair to those who can’t succeed in an elitist system, they should give them choice while continuing to subsidize.

maintenance of public school quality is also a national priority…and [the poor] can’t afford to pay for the private schools.

Ooh, I have a new idea! We could let poor students go to private schools without making them pay! Revolutionary! I call it…vouchers!

We do not need to be subsidizing the private schools against the public, especially not where the private schools would offer scant improvement, and would take dollars away from already ailing schools.

What studies have you been reading? The urban poor jump through hoops and wait on long lists and pray at night for scholarships on the faint hope that they can get their kids into private or suburban public schools. I’m not kidding, ask Ted Kennedy. So you’re really outside the mainstream if you think that private institutions offer “scant improvement”. And if you look at my comments above, you see that the voucher schemes do not take any per-pupil money away from public schools, in fact, they add per-pupil money precisely because the private sector is more efficient. Those efficiency gains can then either be funneled back into the public system, used to reduce deficits elsewhere in government, or given back to taxpayers as a tax break. Having extra money is not a tough problem to solve.

Tierney makes the point in his article that the part of the Florida constitution that liberals are appealing to was part of a racist, nativist package of Jim Crowism that arrived in 1885. Not an aromatic bit of law to be standing on. Even less aromatic is the position that those who oppose school choice find themselves in vis-a-vis poor people. The message is, “Go where you’re told; our ideology is more important than your education.” So keep it up, Dems: the quicker to bring more folks from the cities into the fold of the Party of Commense Sense.

Why are we paying to subsidize another education system unaccountible to the the public, rather than improving the ones that are?
Well Stephen, it’s probably because the public school system is run by liberials who want use it for social expermentation and therefore resist any change that might stop their expermenting with our childrens futures.
While private schools might not be accountible to the public in general, they ARE accountible to the parents of their students. If they fail to perform to the stanards the parents want they will loose students. How many students do you think they can afford to loose before they go under?
Just a case in point. A private school near me is going to have to close because parents are pulling their children out of it because they lowered their grading stanards and wouldn’t listen to the parents when they complained about it.

Chops said:

“And if you look at my comments above, you see that the voucher schemes do not take any per-pupil money away from public schools, in fact, they add per-pupil money precisely because the private sector is more efficient.”

There’s nothing magical about private money that allows it to buy more than public money can. A dollar is a dollar. Private schools outperform public schools because they are better funded, because they set higher standards for admission, and because families that can afford them are usually more stable nuclear families with better home lives.

If you run a public school with the same criteria, you’d likely get the same result. As an example, consider public schools in better neighborhoods, which frequently perform on par with many private schools.

Likewise, school vouchers will simply move the problems of the public schools into private schools. Wouldn’t it be easier to fix the problems in the public schools?

Don’t believe me: go into inner city schools. Look at their budgets, which have increased again and again. Look at their student:teacher ratios, which have decreased and decreased.

This may be true for some inner city school systems but none that I’ve personally seen. In the classrooms I’ve seen, most of the teachers are newbies (few experienced teachers want to work in the inner cities), the classrooms are jammed, kids are often taught with worksheets(sometimes one sheet to multiple students), and the buildings are falling apart due to age and abuse. This is because most school systems are funded locally rather than on a state-wide basis, making funding dependent on property taxes (which are usually much lower in inner cities).

Tierney makes the point in his article that the part of the Florida constitution that liberals are appealing to was part of a racist, nativist package of Jim Crowism that arrived in 1885.

Steve Gey, a professor of constitutional law at Florida state, says this is bogus, noting that it amounts to “a public relations gambit.” He claims there’s just no evidence to support the contention that there was anti-Catholic intent in the amendment.

Party of Commense Sense

“Commense sense” is an interesting phrase. I wish we would get away from ideology and start commencing to make “commensal sense” together.

The true believers on either side of this issue are irresponsible, in my opinion. This is tricky stuff. I agree with Chops that there are inner city kids whose families want vouchers. That’s the truth of it. But vouchers aren’t good or bad in themselves. Like any tool, they can be used in right and wrong ways. The trick is forge a wise middle group that’s not beholden to teachers’ unions OR to the religious right. If only the center could truly hold in America.

There’s nothing magical about private money that allows it to buy more than public money can. A dollar is a dollar. Private schools outperform public schools because they are better funded, because they set higher standards for admission, and because families that can afford them are usually more stable nuclear families with better home lives.

If you run a public school with the same criteria, you’d likely get the same result. As an example, consider public schools in better neighborhoods, which frequently perform on par with many private schools.

That’s well said, Rob. I’d add that there’s just a lot less interference and red tape in many private schools. If we could make public schools less bureaucratic, less litigious and less political, we’d see improvements.

There’s nothing magical about private money that allows it to buy more than public money can. A dollar is a dollar. Private schools outperform public schools because they are better funded, because they set higher standards for admission, and because families that can afford them are usually more stable nuclear families with better home lives.

If you run a public school with the same criteria, you’d likely get the same result. As an example, consider public schools in better neighborhoods, which frequently perform on par with many private schools.

That’s well said, Rob. I’d add that there’s just a lot less interference and red tape in many private schools. If we could make public schools less bureaucratic, less litigious and less political, we’d see improvements.

I have taught in private schools for the past six years. I also attended a private school for 12 years growing up. I consider both schools to be exceptional. This has nothing to do with better funding, I’m not sure about the tuition at the school I attended, but I know that the school I taught at had a tuition of around $3,000. MUCH less than the per student amount that public schools receive.

Both Reed and Rob make good points as to why the private schools tend to out perform the public. I believe the bigger issue is the administrative overhead that causes the need for such huge amounts of tax dollars. But as a teacher I also know that having parents that are interested in the education of the child’s education has a great impact on how well the kid will do.

One argument I have seen here often in support of vouchers is that competition will force the public school to become more efficient in order to win back students and more money. My question is, if you were a principal of an inner-city school that was loosing student population to a private school via a voucher program, what would you do to make your school more efficient and win those students back?

Chops!! Do you realize that you’ve validated the liberal approach to education!?

This proves that more funding and smaller class sizes have a dramatic positive effect on our kid’s education! And in a poor neighborhood even!

More funding + smaller classes = quality education.

That’s great Chops! Thank you for bringing this to my attention. I’ll be linking to it when I write my representatives telling them to budget more money for public education. Thanks again! This is really exciting!

Chops-
I still think it’s foolish to subsidize private schools to do what we’re supposed to do with private ones. The real problem is many schools run on a property tax system that naturally disadvantages places where property values are low. The irony here is that you are willing to fund private schools with state money that doesn’t typically get used to fund public schools.

No, Stephen, the market failure occurs because the government is subsidizing one set of schools (those it controls), and forcing people to pay for it - even those who send their students to private schools.

If you shift the money over to vouchers, you’re doing the same thing. There are going to be people who don’t want to pay for other people’s kids to go to private schools, especially if those schools openly reject their religion. Does an Orthodox Jew, or devout Muslim want to fund a fundamentalist baptist school, or vice versa? At least with a public school, you can ensure a secular, non-sectarian environment that only threatens those who are threatened by modern science period.

The trouble have with your analysis is that you start out with prejudiced position. You start out with the notion that private schools are inherently better, more efficient, and a better use of taxpayer’s money.

I claim nothing either way about public schools. They can be good, bad, and indifferent. But as a person educated in a public school in a working class environment, I can be very thankful for public education. No matter how bad things got for my family’s economic position, I had another year of education waiting for me.

There was nobody telling me, don’t worry about how crappy your education gets, we’re going to give funds to the folks who don’t want to be schooled in a secular setting, and subsidize their private schools.

This is about community values, about valuing the welfare of our cities and towns as a whole, rather than subsidizing the desires and ideologies of the few sectarians and libertarians. This is about a few vocal minorities who want government funding for their education, but are unwilling to compromise with the rest of the public on how they want their children educated.

Ron Brown-
Modern schools run by liberals? perhaps that explain why our textbooks mentions so little of evolution, why literature is so watered down, and why our history books make everything about progress and patriotism, rather than sober analysis. Maybe in the far reaches of San Francisco things get this liberal, but where I came from they slathered the patriotism on us with a spatula. Truth is, part of what waters down todays education is that conservative groups insist on being offended by anything and everything that is meaningful, but doesn’t fit their mold of what children should be taught. Maybe education could stand to get a little more liberal.

AP said:

Chops!! Do you realize that you’ve validated the liberal approach to education!? This proves that more funding and smaller class sizes have a dramatic positive effect on our kid’s education! And in a poor neighborhood even!

Not quite, AP. Money and teachers are the tools with which education is created. However, we have seen over decades that if those tools are simply handed to school districts, they will manage to misuse them and offer little real improvement, especially in the tough schools. The tools need to be combined with motivation, and that’s what competition brings. Without competition, teachers and principals with tough jobs drop out, intellectually, and give up on their urban students. I’m not ideological: I want to find a way that WORKS, so that Joe Urban can learn to read and write. The present public school system hasn’t done that, even with money thrown at it. Private schools have proved that they succeed, even (and especially) for poorer and less-well-prepared students. Rich, well-prepared students can thrive at a half-decent public high school. At-risk students, in general, need something more to succeed; private schools have shown they have that something more. The proof is in the pudding.

Stephen said:

There was nobody telling me, don’t worry about how crappy your education gets, we’re going to give funds to the folks who don’t want to be schooled in a secular setting, and subsidize their private schools.

Stephen, you keep throwing up this straw man argument that vouchers are hurting public education. If this was the case, I wouldn’t be touting them. However, as Tierney’s sources show, the public schools are benefiting from the competition. So ditch the straw man and bring real data on what really works.

Party of Commense Sense

“Commense sense” is an interesting phrase. I wish we would get away from ideology and start commencing to make “commensal sense” together.

Ha, you got me there, Reed! I gess a commense spel chequer woud reellie help mi.

Ron Brown-
Modern schools run by liberals? perhaps that explain why our textbooks mentions so little of
evolution, why literature is so watered down, and why our history books make everything about
progress and patriotism, rather than sober analysis. Maybe in the far reaches of San Francisco things
get this liberal, but where I came from they slathered the patriotism on us with a spatula. Truth is,
part of what waters down todays education is that conservative groups insist on being offended by
anything and everything that is meaningful, but doesn’t fit their mold of what children should be
taught. Maybe education could stand to get a little more liberal.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at June 7, 2005 11:59 PM
————————————————————————-
Stephen,

I totally agree with your view, however I’m afraid you may have set yourself set to lose a few points in the discussion on schools.

Learning grammar and spelling might help your cause. I’m don’t mean to be picky (but I am)
especially when someone discusses education and obviously has not learned the basics for
themselves, it tends to lower their credibility.

I do not advocate vouchers, but wish to work within the system we have to make it better. (And I don’t mean the …ugh….”No Child Left Behind”, which is a wonderful dream, but not very realistic.)

If, however, you are directly quoting Mr. Brown, HEAD of Education, then I think we already
know where the problem lies. He must not have gone to school in the same Public System I did.
(Is it possible that Mr. Brown attended a Private School?)

Unfortunately, most of the persons in today’s post fail in the same manner. At least, please learn how to use a spell checker and grammar checker if your are going to argue about education.

Linda H.

Linda H
I find that I must apologize to Mr. Brown.(If I have mixed up the names) He unfortunately has the same name as the President’s appointment Ronald Brown, Head of the Education Department. I do not apologize for suggesting
that the writer of the first post needs to learn the basics of education.

Chops-
You’re accusing me of logical fallacy here, yet you come right out and tell me that I should believe that vouchers aren’t hurting public education because you you wouldn’t be touting them otherwise. That’s a textbook circular argument.

Public school isn’t about competition for students, and never has been. The model here is social welfare, basic education for any child who shows up. If we start paying folks from the public funds that support our public schools to dilute the competitive environment that drives private schools to excellence (when they are excellent), then we do neither system a favor.

Competition. I’m sick of hearing that word. It’s not that I don’t think it can keep certain industries or economies sharp, or that I don’t think people should do the best that they can. It’s just that Conservatives have made it into such a panacea, when it really requires certain conditions to work well. First of all, there have to be certain things true for competition to be a useful force.

First, you got to be willing to take some losses. Private schools can always kick a student out for poor academic performance. They can also close their doors as they go out of business. Public Schools cannot and should not have that option. Public schools are meant, at the very least, to ensure that any child that shows up can get an education. Kicking a student out for academics or shutting down a school is out of the question.

Second, there has to be some measure of profit and loss. Private schools, in addition to grades, can calculate their competitiveness by their profit, or at least their ability to break even. Public Schools only have their funding. Now you suggest that the loss of that funding can create that competitive pressure, but as first point holds out, people would not stand for their public school going out of business, and shouldn’t. It’s social welfare, and a community resource. It is an institution to be maintained, rather than a private concern to be left to its own devices. The model of competitive pressure can never be taken to its fullest extent, because that final result would be unacceptable. What happens then, is what happens in any government institution taken in that direction: bureaucratic degeneracy. The administration becomes a parasite on the system, and protects itself by not performing a function that the government is unwilling to pay for.

Competition works when only when failure is an acceptable outcome. With institutions like public education, the best course of action is to observe the situation, put forward the policy, and fully fund it. Anything else invites the system to run down.

the public schools are benefiting from the competition.

No, the public schools are benefitting from smaller class sizes and more funding per student. Those conditions aren’t dependent on vouchers.

AP -

No, the public schools are benefitting from smaller class sizes and more funding per student. Those conditions aren’t dependent on vouchers.

Well, in this case it’s hard to tell. Competition and improved resources were introduced at the same time. But other situations, where only resources were introduced, tend not to give the same results. Ergo I draw the conclusion that competition is a key ingredient missing in many cases.

Secondly, since vouchers (when done as Florida has done them) introduce both more resources and competition, the only reason to complain is if you don’t like competition. Some commenters have tried to construe this as a trade-off, when in fact it’s a synergistic system.

I said:

Stephen, you keep throwing up this straw man argument that vouchers are hurting public education. If this was the case, I wouldn’t be touting them. However, as Tierney’s sources show, the public schools are benefiting from the competition.

Stephen responded:

You’re accusing me of logical fallacy here, yet you come right out and tell me that I should believe that vouchers aren’t hurting public education because you you wouldn’t be touting them otherwise. That’s a textbook circular argument.

You misread my argument. I did not say, “Vouchers aren’t hurting education because I’m arguing for them.” I said, “Vouchers aren’t hurting education, therefore I’m arguing for them.” There’s no direct logical link between these two statements; they are both premised on Tierney’s data.

I’m beginning both my arguments from the data, which is that in the Florida case, vouchers are helping two groups of students: those who use them, and those who remain in public schools. Unless you can bring data that shows that some public schools are in fact being hurt by the voucher system, you’re begging the question.

To expand a bit, most of your latest post is a well-reasoned, logical case against vouchers. However, I don’t think it’s supported by the facts. It’s time we moved beyond ideological reasoning and into problem solving, which is exactly what Florida and other states are trying to do, over the objections of public ed. purists. We should be comparing different solutions (e.g. vouchers, charter schools, public school choice, busing, etc) to see which ones give results. No matter how logical a solution is, it’s not worth the zeroes and ones it uses if it doesn’t work.

“Secondly, since vouchers (when done as Florida has done them) introduce both more resources and competition, the only reason to complain is if you don’t like competition.”

Or if you don’t like public money funding religious education.

Well, Chops, I remember hearing about this case in Ohio where they started this voucher thing, and what ended up happening was that quality was all over the place as far as the private schools went, and the real good ones were out of reach of those with vouchers. So, to put it plainly, Vouchers are no solution, and private schools are not the panacea you make it out to be.

I also heard that if you exclude the poorer districts from the equation, that Academic performance in America’s Public Schools is actually fairly high. In short, public education as a system is not the problem. If that were the case, then the system would fail across the board, no matter how much money you pumped into it. The problem with inner city schools is a combination of underfunding the bureaucratic vampirism that often accompanies dysfunctional funding situations.

With vouchers I see a percieved solution in search of a perceived problem. This thinking has been encouraged by those who consider the current system a religious or social problem even when it’s successful, by those who do not want secular or (perceived) socialist/liberal influences on their children. Vouchers constitute just another example of the right trying to entrench it’s position further, and stifle the flow of ideas through society.

Chops:

Jarandhel - It’s easy to make sure existing private school students don’t latch on to the vouchers: make them available only to those who have spent a full year (or two, or whatever) in a failing public school.

I see. So, rather than initiating a real voucher program, we’re talking about making special vouchers available only to specific students in specific districts.

However, there’s nothing wrong with giving them vouchers as well (provided they live in a failing school district), because they’re already paying tax to support the school their kids aren’t attending.

Oh, so we are talking about voucher programs that go towards all students equally. (Though still with the caveat that they need to live in a failing school district? Isn’t that financially punishing those who don’t?)

Then my question remains the same: why would the private schools agree to accept such vouchers as full payment for tuition if they normally get more from parents? Any parent with a student enrolled in a private school within that failed public school district, whether their kids went to public school before or not, would want to use the vouchers provided for free to send their kid to the private school, thus reducing the private school’s funding while putting an increased demand on the school. What school in its right MIND would agree to this? It’s just not a sound business move.

Jarandhel is getting dangerously close to the real issue here. If, by accepting vouchers, a private school is reducing its per-student funding, aren’t they losing one of the main advantages of private schooling? The next step (which will come, believe me) will be when the government requires private schools to meet minimum standards of equal opportunity/access to be eligible for vouchers. Before long, the private schools are going to have the same problems as the public schools, PLUS have the need to pull a profit to survive.

Private schools don’t perform better because they’re private. They perform better because they aren’t hindered by the requirements that public schools are. They can refuse kids with learning disabilities, or with attitude problems, or with no religious conviction, or whose single mother works three jobs and never sees her kids and so can’t help them with their homework. They can refuse kids who don’t come from affluent enough families to be able to afford private schooling. In short, they can refuse kids who would pull their test scores down.

If you make the private schools live up to the same standards of access that the public schools have to live up to, do you really think they’d do any better?

I’m not sure if Jaradhel understands that when the school receives the voucher, they get to cash it in with the state. In this case, they cash it for $4,400.

Obviously, Buckingham, Brown, & Nichols isn’t going to have an influx of urban poor. But there are plenty of small, gritty private schools designed for poor urban students in urban settings. One reason so many of these schools are religious is that it’s not fun, easy, and profitable for teachers/admin (like Andover or Exeter).

Also, Rob, private schools obviously get many of their advantages from having less regulation, and from having the right to refuse service. They also have a much easier time expelling criminal or deadbeat students who drag down the classroom environment. You seem to think these are artificial, unfair advantages. My approach is that these are real and will last, because of the nature of public bureaucracy, and we should admit that the government simply isn’t as good as private people at running anything, so we as a society should take advantage of the latter, rather than just dismissing it as elitist.

Think about this from the point of view of a poor parent. What do you want? The best education for your kid. A school where he can be safe from violence. Private schools - even those inhabited largely by poor students - have a reputation of providing this. Why is that wrong?

The vouchers are actually giving private schools more money than they charge for tuition in most cases. This article shows how the average private school tuition is $4,689, and an average of $7,524 is spent on each public school student.

Chops,

“Also, Rob, private schools obviously get many of their advantages from having less regulation, and from having the right to refuse service. They also have a much easier time expelling criminal or deadbeat students who drag down the classroom environment. You seem to think these are artificial, unfair advantages.”

If these are desirable traits in a school, why don’t we simply adopt them in public schools and let them reap the benefits? Wouldn’t this be easier than a voucher program that will have the same effect? I argue that we have a responsibility to educate ALL students, including the deadbeats.

Think about it from the point of view of a parent whose son has been hanging out with gangs, starting fights at school, and experimenting with illegal drugs. What do you want? The best education for your kid. A school where he can be safe from violence and bad influences. Private schools will refuse him because of his background. Public school is his only option.

What would you recommend for that parent? Where in your voucher programs do you address her problems?

Linda,
I went to a public school, that’s why I cann’t spell. My daddy always asked me how it was Icould read but couldn’t spell.
Really I went to a public school in South Georgia, and for all it’s short comings, it was still provided a decent education. That’s more than I can say for the same school today.
When I stared school we had only one building that housed grades 1-12, Kintergaurden was added when I was in the 3rd grade.
The my graduating class was 32, and that was about the student teacher ratio for the whole school. Of the 35 in my class 3 did not graduate. One was held back because of poor grades (try that today) one had dropped out and the other was in a bad wreck just before the end of the 1st semester. Of the 10 or 15 that took the SAT, ALL PASTED.
Today the same school system has a primary school, an elementary school, a middle schoo and a high school. The student teacher ratio is about 24:1. Of a senior class of about 100 only 66 graduated this year, of about 50 who took the SAT only 10 passed. And all the while the liberial administration insist that they have a GREAT school system.

Hi All:

Why don’t we and our elected officials sit down, state our biggest gripes and our solutions. Griping without offering up legitamite solutions, is no more than Bitchn. We offer up our complaints put them up in order of importance to us. Safety, quality of education, number & sizes of classrooms these should be included, to name but a few.
Getting new uniforms for the high school football team should not be on that agenda at all. You can organize a booster club for that. You all can think of whatever it is that your schools need to have. Buildings, textbooks or teachers are always good choices.
Oh, parents don’t expect your child will be the next Allen Iverson, Tiger Woods, Or Mia Hamm. You are probably setting them up for failure in the future. Have them concentrate on the skills that will bring forth the riches that a good Education in life brings. No matter what life holds, they will be forever prepared. Remember also, this world needs plumbers, carpenters, and auto mechanics, just as much as Doctors and engineers.
Once we have figured out how to save the world, feed the hungry, and shelter the homeless. We need to wake up, grab a cup-o-jo, take a shower, get dressed, and head out the door…To our mundane jobs. Someone has to work even if this is “Fantasy Island”.

As Always,
Wayne

But other situations, where only resources were introduced, tend not to give the same results. Ergo I draw the conclusion that competition is a key ingredient missing in many cases.

Could you provide an example of some of those other situations? Thanks!

BTW, Michael Jackson will be opening a private school as soon as this silly trial thing is over. I understand the tuition will be really cheap.

Two questions: What happens when private schools raise their tution, or don’t have space for new children?

Ron - I went to a similar school in the fifties, myself - but I still learned how to use the cut/paste part of my computer to check my spelling and grammar.
Linda

American Pundit,

from the link I provided earlier.

And something of interest that counters most of my thoughts on public education.

First, the test figures quoted by the Commission were unadjusted for changes in the demographics of the test-taking population. Recent renormings of the major standardized tests show the test score decline was never really as deep nor as prolonged as was originally claimed. There never really was a genuine decline in SAT scores. When one examines renormed averages, a surprising phenomenon occurs — while the average of all students taking the test has indeed declined, the average of any normed subgroup has risen rather steadily. The apparent paradox is caused by an increase in the number of students taking the test from the bottom half of the class

Based largely on existing data, the Sandia researchers found that high school completion rates in the US are among the highest in the world, that SAT score decline has been caused by changes in the demographics of the test-taking population, and that comparisons between American and foreign students are invalid due to the selective — often elitist — nature of overseas educational systems. In addition, claims that increased funding have not lead to increased educational outcomes ignore the fact that additional expenditures have gone almost entirely to special education and transportation.

And my favorite part.

These findings are completely at odds with the neoconservative party line. Controversy surfaced in 1991 when reports began circulating that the Bush Administration was involved in suppressing the Sandia study because of “conflicts with its own rhetoric.”

Like father like son. :)

Chops-

Obviously, Buckingham, Brown, & Nichols isn’t going to have an influx of urban poor. But there are plenty of small, gritty private schools designed for poor urban students in urban settings. One reason so many of these schools are religious is that it’s not fun, easy, and profitable for teachers/admin (like Andover or Exeter).

The Reputation of private schools, which you generalize again and again, is many ways based on the reputation of these richer schools you mention. In the Ohio case, what legislators found out was that the private schools often were small, gritty, and provided worse education than their public counterparts. Fly by night operations were set up to accept this free public money. As for the sectarian nature of many of these schools. I don’t think they’re resorting to religious schooling because they need the faith to suffer the trials of educating kids. The kids are the reason: religious parents want their kids educated in an environment that doesn’t contradict their principles.

It’s a free country, and if they want that education for their kids, they can pay the tuition. I’m sure there are private means to provide an endowment of one kind or another to defray costs of tuition, but I don’t think the Government should pay with our money to school kids in somebody else’s religion.

Also, Rob, private schools obviously get many of their advantages from having less regulation, and from having the right to refuse service. They also have a much easier time expelling criminal or deadbeat students who drag down the classroom environment.

As a person with a learning disability who had academic and discipline problems in my teens due to my problem, I am glad nobody was able to kick me out. It would have been the simple answer, but not the right one. I think some conservatives should learn that distinction: simple answers are not always the right ones.

You seem to think these are artificial, unfair advantages. My approach is that these are real and will last, because of the nature of public bureaucracy, and we should admit that the government simply isn’t as good as private people at running anything, so we as a society should take advantage of the latter, rather than just dismissing it as elitist.

I have had enough experience of private
Bureaucracy to know that it is little different than public. The results are the same. Red tape doesn’t change colors when it comes from an insurance company or a state agency. I know, I’ve had to deal with both. The truth is, businesses behave in the same way when they have an assurance of a broad customer base, and little chance of suffering consequences for it.

What’s to stop the private schools from becoming more bureacratic and rife with the bad habits of entitlement when they start sucking off the public teat? And isn’t the whole point of the public school system that we pool our resources as a community, rather than divide them out in ways that only benefit the sectarians of religion and politics?

“Pro choice”, as used in this article, has nothing to do with the abortion issue. Reading skills really should be essential. The pro choice term is meant to mean the right to choose the school your child attends.

Vouchers will be good for our education system. Is there anything good left in our education system? Our country produces the worst caliber of workers in the modern world. If you want really good engineers or computer programmers or virtually anything else that requires a brain….you must import workers from India or China.

Our schools suck. There is no easier way to explain it.

For those afraid that schools will become indoctrination hubs…..that’s what they are now. Did you know, that today’s students, when leaning about WWII, learn nothing about Patten or Ike or Pearl Harbour. What they learn is that the US Army was segregated, that Americans are racist and that Hawaii statehood was US imperiolism.

The former Secretary of Education stated that the teacher’s union was a terrorist organization causing more harm against the US than any other terrorist organization. He is right!

Voucherplan that could work - Each student should get a certain amount in a voucher that can be spent at the school of their choice. (pro choice - free market) Schools would not be allowed to charge more than the amount of the vouchers.

Private schools will not be sucking on the government teat, they will be depending on their customers (students) They would be forced to perform or go out of business.

SirisC and Chops:

I am aware that the schools get to cash the voucher. But as SirisC pointed out, the average tuition for a private school is $4,689 and these vouchers are only good for 4,400 and must be accepted as full tuition. According to basic math, it would not be a sound business decision for any school currently charging the average fee or above to accept this reduced fee as full payment for tuition for any students, since its existing students would almost certainly also demand the same deal, especially since their parents would not need to pay the money provided by the vouchers out of their own pockets. So I’ll ask again, why are schools willing to accept the vouchers as full payment? Are we only catering in this situation to those schools whose tuition is below the average? Wouldn’t that indicate that the schools themselves are also below average for private schools?

I’ll also add that if current private school students do switch over to using the vouchers to pay for their private school education, as seems inevitable in a publicly funded voucher system, this would put additional strain on the public school system by taking money from it for students whose education has previously been entirely privately funded. Why would anyone continue to pay for themselves if the government would provide that payment in full? This influx could well exceed the surplus money that is supposedly going to stay with the public school districts, since one child’s voucher equals $1,276 more than the difference between what public schools currently spend on an enrolled student and the value of a private school voucher.

Hey Chops…where did you learn your reasoning skills? The Heritage Foundation? The way I interpret the news story you got all excited about is this: Student-to-teacher ratio goes from 30>1 to 22>1…add the extra $1000 per escaping pupil that the district gets to keep…and that equals more spending per pupil AND more time from the teacher per student! Moral of the story: fund the schools so they can hire additional and better qualified teachers, and you get better students! And I don’t even need a college degree to figure that one out!

Voucherplan that could work - Each student should get a certain amount in a voucher that can be spent at the school of their choice. (pro choice - free market)

Ok…

Schools would not be allowed to charge more than the amount of the vouchers.

WTF!!? What happened to the “free market” part? You know whatcha got with that scheme, James? A public school system.

Carri, you’re absolutely right. This post is proof that Democrats are right on education.

smaller classes + more funding = quality education.

Our schools suck.

No, but they could be better.

You can still have “free market” for the parents, even if you institute government price control. It happens all the time….in many of our products.

Have you ever hired anyone ? Our schools do suck. At best, they are 2nd rate schools. “Dumbed down” is a correct term and a real event that has been happening for the last 60 years. It appears the reasonning is this: Little Johnny gets passing grades and shipped through school, because we don’t want him to have to live with the stigma of failing. Guess what ? Little Johnny is going to know he is a dumb ass when he reaches 30 years of age and realizes that he cannot read. Try to live with that stigma.

I don’t want to put down teachers in general. But if you go to a mechanic and he screws up your car, would you bring the car back to the same mechanic ???? Teaching is a great professional, but not all teachers are great professionals…the bad ones should be weeded out.

Vouchers would allow a parent to make the choice. Why shouldn’t a public school have to compete ?

You cannot really believe that the Dems public school system has been working for the last 60 years. Ask 10 people you know to factor a polynomial. How many do you think can do it ? (we’re talking 8th grade math here, maybe 6th grade)

The real reason Dems want public schools is: it ensures that enough knuckleheads will be created to fill the welfare rolls and vote democratic. Plus they can promote sex education and abortion rights and not teach reading, riting, and rithmatic. No comments on my spelling please, I went to a public school.

Have you ever hired anyone ?

Yes: Americans, Canadians, Indians, IraniansPersians, British and Chinese. I can’t honestly say that any of them were any dumber than the rest (though for some reason the Brits have a penchant for making things way more complicated than they should be).

So, I guess you’re wrong and I’m right.

AMERICAN PUNDIT: “So, I guess you’re wrong and I’m right.”

Comments like that should always end with:

Nanna Nanna Nah Nah

I simply cannot let this go without responding to James’ statement:

You cannot really believe that the Dems public school system has been working for the last 60 years. Ask 10 people you know to factor a polynomial. How many do you think can do it ? (we’re talking 8th grade math here, maybe 6th grade)

The real reason Dems want public schools is: it ensures that enough knuckleheads will be created to fill the welfare rolls and vote democratic. Plus they can promote sex education and abortion rights and not teach reading, riting, and rithmatic. No comments on my spelling please, I went to a public school.

Don’t use going to public school as an excuse for you p!$$-poor reasoning skills. Did you forget the fact that student test scores have plummetted since the Republicans started their tax-cutting craze in the late 70’s-mid-80’s? Hello? Smart teachers are not going to settle for overcrowded schools, low wages/benefits, and being treated like second-class citizens. So you get a higher percentage of less-qualified teachers—barely able to get through school themselves.

And as for your sorry reasoning for why Democrats want public schools—the John Birch Society is looking for a few good members. (BTW: did you know abortions and STD’s have increased since Bush became prez? I guess sex education in public schools was working!) I’ll tell you what I understand to be some of the reasons: a more integrated system produces a more tolerable citizenry, which in turn leads to a better-civilized society (not the exclusionary effects private schools have), which leads to the progress of civilization in general. It’s so evident that the recent promotion and infiltration of fundamentalist/neo-conservative “values” has led to increased intolerance and hatred of those *different* than yourself, unquestioning love of country and authority, and promotion of fascist values. Our country has taken a giant leap backwards these past 20 years.

You must have gotten an “F” in history, civics, and social studies. And your *cute* comment about your intentional bad spelling (of 3 words) being the product of attending public schools was so obviously lame and immature…it seems you got a very good education in the spelling and sentence structure department, at least.

Hi All:

James:

You are being quoted by Carri above as having said the following:
You cannot really believe that the Dems public school system has been working for the last 60 years. Ask 10 people you know to factor a polynomial. How many do you think can do it ? (we’re talking 8th grade math here, maybe 6th grade)
The real reason Dems want public schools is: it ensures that enough knuckleheads will be created to fill the welfare rolls and vote democratic. Plus they can promote sex education and abortion rights and not teach reading, riting, and rithmatic. No comments on my spelling please, I went to a public school.

Are you serious? It has been 30+ years since anyone even asked me to factor a polynomial.

According to Dictionary.com:

A taxonomic designation consisting of more than two terms.
Mathematics
An algebraic expression consisting of one or more summed terms, each term consisting of a constant multiplier and one or more variables raised to integral powers. For example, x 2 - 5x + 6 and 2p 3 q + y are polynomials. Also called multinomial .
An expression of two or more terms.

I guess, you remember it so well because of the word “Taxonomic” used in the definition. Tell me, were you taught to hate all Dems by this age(8th Grade) also? BTW, Not all of us “Liberal Democrats” hate you either. Just those of you that have a problem hiding your “conical” hats!

As Always,
Wayne

Hi All:

Just thought I’d throw my two bits into ante up:

(BTW: did you know abortions and STD’s have increased since Bush became prez? I guess sex education in public schools was working!)

Well stated Carri.

As Always,
Wayne

Carri, and Wayne,

Carri -

You’re helping to prove my point….thanks.

your words - Smart teachers are not going to settle for overcrowded schools, low wages / benefits, and being treated like second-class citizens ?

I agree !

You assume that I’m promoting “the exclusionary effects private schools” when I am not. Good public schools will beneifit from vouchers and bad public schools will crumble or become good. Currently the education system’s pay and advancement structure, in most states, is comparable to communism, in that, all teachers get tha same 3% raise whether they taught well the past year or not. The there are pay advancements for longevity (5 yrs, 10 yrs and so on) Take the best teacher in the state and the worst teacher in the state and - if they have the same level of education and they start teaching at the same time in 20 years they’ll both be making the same amount. It is my opinion that many teachers “do settle” for teaching because they failed in the real world. You know, “those who can do ……..”

As for the STD and abortion stats that you quote, is that for school age children or the entire population? Also, with cause and effect in mind, does effect follow cause immediately or does it take a while for cause to create effect? My point being…how many std’s and abortions are caused by abstinance ? And, how many were caused by watching the president admit that he had sex with his employees, that his marraige is a sham, that even though he “was” a lawyer and an officer of the court, he still lied under oath.

The only thing I can say about STD’s and Abortion is: I believe the fetus of an american woman is itself an American citizen and has all the same civil rights as you and I.

Wayne - I never said I hated Dems. I voted for some Dems in 2004, at the state level. Also, I understand that many people haven’t done any algebra in many years….that’s not my point…my point is many students are graduating HS without ever having to complete algebra or anything else that might be a little difficult. The 3 R’s are being replaced by ….well, you figure out what they are being replaced by.

Answer this….In the future do we need more math and science being mandatory in our schools or do we need less ?

The only thing I can say about STD’s and Abortion is: I believe the fetus of an american woman is itself an American citizen and has all the same civil rights as you and I.

So, are those fetuses born or simply naturalized in the United States?

I’ll grant that fetuses may arguably have *human* rights, at least at some stages of their development, but the idea that they are citizens with civil rights is laughable. The Constitution is at least quite clear about the requirements for being considered a citizen. It is very possible they could be considered “persons” under the constitution, again more possible at some stages of fetal development than others, but they can’t possibly be citizens until they are born here.

The declairation is not part of the constitution, I admit that. But the declaration of independance does shed some light on how the founding fathers thought about certain matters. They did state that “all men are created equal” not “born” equal.

I did not want this discussion to turn into an abortion debate. (I’m sure there is another discussion where we can fight about abortion) I was just answering carri’s comments about sex ed in school. She, in turn, was responding to my comment about schools not teaching what they should.

This discussion is suppose to be about the parent’s right to “choice” verses the government’s need to indoctrinate our children into the Borg collective.

Forgive the star trek comparrison, but the similarities are there if you look real close.

Carri:

” (BTW: did you know abortions and STD’s have increased since Bush became prez? I guess sex education in public schools was working!) “

Though I am not one to generally defend Bush, I hope you know this is factually incorrect. According to the center for disease control, STDs and abortions have decreased during Bush’s term, but the rate of decrease has slowed.

I don’t want to get into this back biting discussion, but thought at least you folks ought to use facts mixed in with the viciousness.

Carri:

check this link with regard to the bogus abortion claim.

The declairation is not part of the constitution, I admit that. But the declaration of independance does shed some light on how the founding fathers thought about certain matters. They did state that “all men are created equal” not “born” equal.

Agreed. The crux of my disagreement with you, however, is that they did not state that all men are created citizens. Citizenship is determined by birth, nothing else. As I said earlier, fetuses may arguably be considered “Persons” under the constitution, that is up for much debate, but in no way can they be considered citizens at all. It is the same way in which a foreigner may have constitutional rights in the US, but is not considered a citizen.

I did not want this discussion to turn into an abortion debate. (I’m sure there is another discussion where we can fight about abortion) I was just answering carri’s comments about sex ed in school. She, in turn, was responding to my comment about schools not teaching what they should.

Then why did you introduce the idea in the first place? No one else had brought definitions of citizenship into this, Carri simply attributed a current (apparently nonexistent, though widely believed) rise in abortion and stds to changing policies with regard to sex education. You introduced a non sequitur with your statement that fetuses are citizens too, which I replied to briefly and factually. There’s not really any room for debate in that regard, so I wouldn’t worry about the subject changing to abortion debate.

This discussion is suppose to be about the parent’s right to “choice” verses the government’s need to indoctrinate our children into the Borg collective.

Forgive the star trek comparrison, but the similarities are there if you look real close.

Seems to me it’s really more about parents who don’t want their children educated by the Federation, despite being members of it already, but do want the Federation to pay for them being educated elsewhere. Maybe you didn’t notice, but the federation itself is fairly socialistic. And a lot more indoctrinating into groupthink, aka “the Borg” goes on at private religious schools than does in the public school system. I’ve been in both.

Wayne - I never said I hated Dems. I voted for some Dems in 2004, at the state level. Also, I understand that many people haven’t done any algebra in many years….that’s not my point…my point is many students are graduating HS without ever having to complete algebra or anything else that might be a little difficult. The 3 R’s are being replaced by ….well, you figure out what they are being replaced by.

Answer this….In the future do we need more math and science being mandatory in our schools or do we need less ?

Well, I’d definately say more of a tailored education. Would you admit that not all students are suited to go to college or university? They should be geared or steered in a more technically or trades related path. Would you not agree? As for more/less mathematics and science? I don’t know and don’t think I am qualified to answer the educational needs of one student over another. But, I do know this. I’d hate to deny a diploma to a student who met all the other requirements just because they couldn’t tell you the value of (2x+2y) =20, but did a damn fine job rewiring your your 67 Corvette. What do you think? While you are pondering your answer, that same student just rebuilt your carborater. Seems a shame to not award him a diploma because he could not factor a polynomial correctly. This same studentalso works 40 hours weekly/supporting his family.
Come up with alternative mathematics and sciences courses.

Also, I’m glad to see you have an open mind. BTW..just so that you know, I’ve Voted for members of the GOP in my past also.
OH…x=4,y=6

Wayne,

I do try to keep an open mind.

The 67 corvette, ok, I do get your point, but, there are fewer and fewer 67 corvettes left.

My point being, would you push a student, today, into being a black smith (wagon wheels and horse shoes) ??

Today’s corvette has as many microprocessors in it as a laptop computer, maybe more. Tomorrow’s will have even fewer moving parts

I do not admit that “not all student’s are not fit for college”. Barring mental defect, all children have the ability to do well in all subjects.

I do admit that parents are more responsible for our educational decay than the schools themselves. But only because they are sitting idle.

The schools themselves are actively seeking to be destructive.

If you don’t see the huge problems with our education system then you either have no children or your head in the sand.

Hi All:

James:
Good points, all well received. I live in Los Angeles County here in sunny SoCal. We are growing here at such a rate, I wonder if we’ll ever catch up. There are some really great teachers here, but I genuinly think they are overwhelmed by the teacher:student ratio. We have students in the HS’s here that literally do not have enough A)Classroom space, B)books C)Desks…pick one or all of those and more, if I went to school Today, I would probably drop out just because of the lack of facilities, not to mention the outside pressures(do I fit in, etc).
Then we have Governor Ahnold who has cherrypicked funds from everywhere in the State’s Education Budget to pay for nonsense(his pet projects). Then he blames Firemen, Nurses, and Teachers for the state’s budget woes. Or he’ll sit there in Sacramento and throw out one-liners from the Governors Office like his famous “gurly menh” We should have learned this from the last time we elected an actor to run this state “You can’t soar with eagles, when you have monkies minding the store”, Good thing is this, this governor Can not run for president. PHHEEWWWW

As Always,
Wayne

Wayne:

Actually, x = 10 - y.

2x + 2y = 20
2x + 2y - 2y = 20 - 2y
2x = 20 - 2y
2x/2 = (20 - 2y)/2
x = 10 - y

4 and 6 are a possible solution, but so are 5 and 5, 2 and 8, 7 and 3, 9 and 1, and 10 and 0. And that’s just keeping the answers in positive integers. Nothing inherent in the problem says you couldn’t use decimals as well, or even negative numbers, or both… which would open up a literally infinite range of possible answers. The only solution which represents all of those answers is x = 10 - y.

Maybe we do need more math in schools… I hate to agree with that, though. Math was my least-favorite subject. ;-)

Jarandhel
Point well received, At 42 years old, I can not factor a polynomial any better than I could when I was in the 7th grade. Big difference now though, in 7th grade when I couldn’t do it, only the kids in my class knew about it. Now, thanks to you and the wonders of technology, The entire world knows. Well, Thank you very, very, much I can now say I have made an (barnyard animal) of myself for the entire world to see.

As Always & now world famous,
Wayne

Wayne:

Actually, x = 10 - y.

2x + 2y = 20
2x + 2y - 2y = 20 - 2y
2x = 20 - 2y
2x/2 = (20 - 2y)/2
x = 10 - y

4 and 6 are a possible solution, but so are 5 and 5, 2 and 8, 7 and 3, 9 and 1, and 10 and 0. And that’s just keeping the answers in positive integers. Nothing inherent in the problem says you couldn’t use decimals as well, or even negative numbers, or both… which would open up a literally infinite range of possible answers. The only solution which represents all of those answers is x = 10 - y.

Maybe we do need more math in schools… I hate to agree with that, though. Math was my least-favorite subject. ;-)

Posted by: Jarandhel at June 14, 2005 03:23 PM

Wayne:

Sorry, but it seemed relevant in a discussion about the quality of our educational system. It could also be interpreted, though, as an illustration of how rarely even an intelligent person such as yourself uses this level of math, which might possibly mean it’s a waste of time and money in our school system except for people going into specialized career fields. Pretty much an individual choice on how to interpret that.

Hi All:

Jarandhel:
I took a BA in Management, why you ask, Because it only required me to take Math 101. I have thoroughly enjoyed our banter back and forth on this thread, you have made this very enjoyable. Thank You!
Wayne

Hi All:
I have to retract the following that, I praised the Dems for:

After checking these with factchec.org .

I have found this to be false.

(BTW: did you know abortions and STD’s have increased since Bush became prez? I guess sex education in public schools was working!)

Well stated Carri.

As Always,
Wayne

Posted by: Wayne at June 13, 2005 04:12

As Always,
Wayne

Wayne,

You’re not a barnyard animal. You actually did solve the polynomial. The fact that there are other solutions reveals that there is something that can be learned from math that has little to do with numbers. And that is the fact that there isn’t necessarily only one way to solve a problem.

You’re not a barnyard animal. You do understand the concepts and rules behind the factoring, you just made a mistake. With a couple weeks of on the job training, you could probably perform factoring as a job, if there were such a job. Simply because you had trouble solving a problem does not mean that it is worthless and should not be taught to all students. You would be surprised how much math that 67 corvette mechanic really has to do. The gasoline engine is still a technical machine. Try doing air intake to gas ratios.

I’m 42 also, I retired from military at 37 and I now teach computer science at the college level. I have the task of teaching 1st year comp sci to students with non technical majors. I’ve been teaching for 5 years and those 5 years are what I base my opinions on.

50% of the HS graduates that I see, (which means they are students who have gone on to college) have no idea how to factor 2x + 2y = 20. Now there is very little need for factoring in my class, but we do cover binary and octal numbering systems and numbers (squared) and (cubed) and I get the same dumfounded ness. Again, these are the HS students who go on to college, God help those who barely passed.

Life begins as a walk down a hallway with a million open doors. The decisions you make in life determines which doors remain open to you and which close. High School is too soon in life to start slamming a whole bunch of those doors.

Wayne,

Plus, I’m not sure if 2x+2y=20 is, in fact, a polynomial. I think it is a binomial. I think a polymonial is X(2) + 4X +4 = 0

X(2) meaning X squared