School choice

[Cannot_Wait_4Disney]

I don't know if it was school choice per se, but my district hired a new superintendent who had grand ideas. It happened just after I left, but they eventually turned most of the high schools and middle schools into magnet schools of one type or another. One was supposed to be a science and technology magnet, while mine was supposed to be an arts and letters magnet. It turned into somewhat of a disaster because they overspent on it. It hadn't been implemented yet, but one of my science teachers was openly discussing how unhappy she was that she as a science teacher might be teaching at a school where the better science students might be jumping ship. It was a largish school district, but not one large enough that there could be a few magnet schools interspersed among many general high schools. Basically every high school had to turn into a magnet school.
I mentioned they overspent. What then happened was that they went bankrupt and went into receivership under the state. The superintendent was fired along the way, although he got hired by another district (which also fired him). The main problem was that he promised a lot and actually managed to deliver. However, he never really thought out how the district would pay for it.

I would think a district that was small enough where every school had to be a magnet school to do it probably wouldn't have the money. BTW our county was the original target. But our district ultimately decided we weren't big enough to make it work. Our county has been affected as well though. We have students attending illegally. The district has taken counter measures but those only go so far. If someone has an address they can use and family or friends willing to put names on bills, the district can't do anything. They're not going to hire a detective agency to stop it. Too expensive. We're building a new high school, middle school, and elementary school and the moment they open, they and the rest of our schools will still be over crowded.

 

[mummabear]

If everyone thought like that, nobody would ever volunteer for anything.

Actually it's people being willing to give one or the other, but to give neither and still expect to get the same as those that do is where the problem is.

 

[bcla]

I would think a district that was small enough where every school had to be a magnet school to do it probably wouldn't have the money. BTW our county was the original target. But our district ultimately decided we weren't big enough to make it work. Our county has been affected as well though. We have students attending illegally. The district has taken counter measures but those only go so far. If someone has an address they can use and family or friends willing to put names on bills, the district can't do anything. They're not going to hire a detective agency to stop it. Too expensive. We're building a new high school, middle school, and elementary school and the moment they open, they and the rest of our schools will still be over crowded.

This superintendent was infamous. He'd actually been through a couple of jobs where he delivered but they couldn't really pay for it. I think he had one more job after our district, and he got that one in financial trouble. It was a larger district though.

I have heard of some districts that ended up prosecuting address fraud cases. I guess within a district is one thing, but across district boundaries is where the big fraud is. We had a few cases in our school where the teachers knew, but didn't care. They were mostly barely into the next school's zone map, and the assigned school was closer.

Here's one case:

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation-world/national/article24784459.html

Some schools have bounties for ratting out parents.

 

[Cannot_Wait_4Disney]

This superintendent was infamous. He'd actually been through a couple of jobs where he delivered but they couldn't really pay for it. I think he had one more job after our district, and he got that one in financial trouble. It was a larger district though.

I have heard of some districts that ended up prosecuting address fraud cases. I guess within a district is one thing, but across district boundaries is where the big fraud is. We had a few cases in our school where the teachers knew, but didn't care. They were mostly barely into the next school's zone map, and the assigned school was closer.

Here's one case:

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation-world/national/article24784459.html

Some schools have bounties for ratting out parents.

Whoa. Bounties for tattling, private investigators creepily following students, and hiring full time residency officers. Seems heavy handed and expensive just to catch a few more than they otherwise would.

 

[DisneyOma]

I wouldn't demand every other student be held up.

And who does? Why would you say that? Where does the above happen?

 

[3 MEN AND A BOAT]

And who does? Why would you say that? Where does the above happen?

You suggested I go to another country to learn a new language.

Refuses to learn the common language? Do you know how long it takes to learn enough vocabulary to understand a high school level class? Maybe you should go to another country (Japan, perhaps, or Norway, maybe China) and try to take a high school class in Biology. Then you could understand the difficulty and effort it takes to be able to learn in a different language.

 

[Gracie09]

You suggested I go to another country to learn a new language.

My daughters go to school with children who speak, Mandarin, Hindi, and Spanish as their first language. No one is "held up" because they receive ESL services just like no one is held up because my dd receives speech services and replacement language arts. The children work incredibly hard and its a great learning experience for the other children. My dds know a few words of Mandarin and Hindi (and Spanish because they have Spanish class) that they picked up over the years. They also are exposed to different holidays and cultures which in and of itself is an excellent education.

 

[3 MEN AND A BOAT]

My daughters go to school with children who speak, Mandarin, Hindi, and Spanish as their first language. No one is "held up" because they receive ESL services just like no one is held up because my dd receives speech services and replacement language arts. The children work incredibly hard and its a great learning experience for the other children. My dds know a few words of Mandarin and Hindi (and Spanish because they have Spanish class) that they picked up over the years. They also are exposed to different holidays and cultures which in and of itself is an excellent education.

I'm sure they do. I was addressing a poster earlier in this thread that said choice schools wouldn't have to take children that "didn't" speak English and I stated that other children shouldn't be held up because they don't learn the common language. It's went on from their.

 

[Gracie09]

I'm sure they do. I was addressing a poster earlier in this thread that said choice schools wouldn't have to take children that "didn't" speak English and I stated that other children shouldn't be held up because they don't learn the common language. It's went on from their.

I understand but no one gets "held up" because of ESL students. That is not how it works. Your premise is flawed.

 

[3 MEN AND A BOAT]

I understand but no one gets "held up" because of ESL students. That is not how it works. Your premiss is flawed.

If a child doesn't speak English how can it not hold up others? At the very least it takes $$ for tutors. Which is the argument some in this thread use against school choice. So it's not flawed.

 

[Colleen27]

But ability largely can be determined by choice, my family makes the choice for me to be a stay at home parent so I can dedicate time to our children.
We do this at a financial sacrifice, my peers who work sacrifice time to earn money. So why should they get the benefit of their earnings and the benefit of my time?

Exactly. I'm a SAHM, have been for 15+years. Why in the world should the taxpayers help pay my girls' private school tuition? Is that really the most efficient used of educational dollars that could be used instead for improving public schools for the benefit of all the kids who don't have other options?

This confuses me and perhaps some can answer. Maybe it varies by state--but I had thought, perhaps incorrectly, that money only goes to the school for actual students in the seat? So if the student opted to pay for private school, the school "loses" money anyway.

It varies some by state but I think the basic process is similar in most places. Yes, the school is paid by butts in seats. So yes, the school loses money when parents make the choice to send their kids to private school. But those dollars are effectively "left behind" in the state education coffers and thus have an impact on overall funding models. Vouchers are a double blow - the local school sees the same loss, one less butt means one less per-pupil funding grant amount, but the state also sees a drain on the overall educational pot because they're issuing vouchers to the families who opted out.

So, for example, my kids attend a very small private school with about 300 kids K-12. Right now, those kids don't bring any state funding to any school but also don't cost the state anything. But under even a modest voucher plan - say, $5,000 per student - they'd represent an additional 1.5 million dollar educational expense the state would have to cover. That, writ large over whole states, would siphon large sums away from the educational budget. So even schools that don't see a significant amount of student loss would feel the impact as public school budgets are re-balanced to account for the loss.

 

[low-key]

choice (competition) brings out the best in everyone

 

[CarolAnn856]

If a child doesn't speak English how can it not hold up others? At the very least it takes $$ for tutors. Which is the argument some in this thread use against school choice. So it's not flawed.

Providing funding for public school students to receive an education is paramount to having an educated society. Whether those funds are for gifted education, ELL services, OTs, special education, music, or good old math and reading, the funds serve the greater good. Pulling that money so children can attend private schools instead goes against that. The logic is not flawed. You are attempting, and failing, to draw parallels where there are none.

 

[3 MEN AND A BOAT]

Providing funding for public school students to receive an education is paramount to having an educated society. Whether those funds are for gifted education, ELL services, OTs, special education, music, or good old math and reading, the funds serve the greater good. Pulling that money so children can attend private schools instead goes against that. The logic is not flawed. You are attempting, and failing, to draw parallels where there are none.

I don't think giving parents a choice is hurting anyone. So we disagree.
How is it that paying for special tutors to teach children English is not removing money from the greater good, but letting a parent take the funds (for their child) to a private school goes against the greater good?
My parallel is solid. You might disagree but that's why we're here, to discuss.

 

[bcla]

I don't think giving parents a choice is hurting anyone. So we disagree.
How is it that paying for special tutors to teach children English is not removing money from the greater good, but letting a parent take the funds (for their child) to a private school goes against the greater good?
My parallel is solid. You might disagree but that's why we're here, to discuss.

Those services (ESL, special education) are available to everyone as needed regardless of ability to pay. Vouchers are pretty much useful only for parents who can afford bridge the funding gap for private school tuition. It's also taking away "critical mass" funding need for infrastructure.

 

[3 MEN AND A BOAT]

Those services (ESL, special education) are available to everyone as needed regardless of ability to pay. Vouchers are pretty much useful only for parents who can afford bridge the funding gap for private school tuition. It's also taking away "critical mass" funding need for infrastructure.

And those services (ESL, special ed) cost money. Aren't the vouchers made available to all? Covering the gap is the same way the Earned Income Tax Credit and Child Tax Credits are sold, as a bridge to help people provide. Heaven forbid the middle class get something. To the critical infrastructure. So what, schools aren't doing a peachy king job now, therefore I'm not concerned with their infrastructure. I'm concerned with getting my child an education.

 

[bcla]

And those services (ESL, special ed) cost money. Aren't the vouchers made available to all? Covering the gap is the same way the Earned Income Tax Credit and Child Tax Credits are sold, as a bridge to help people provide. Heaven forbid the middle class get something. To the critical infrastructure. So what, schools aren't doing a peachy king job now, therefore I'm not concerned with their infrastructure. I'm concerned with getting my child an education.

I see a critical difference between a need covered by public funds and a wish for those who want public funding to pay for a choice. And those services aren't means tested. I know at my kid's school there are several special-ed kids who are from middle-class families. I've chatted with an administrator at my kid's private preschool, and she noted that special-ed services are available to all students (including preschoolers) living in the district and covered by the district - even if they're in private schools. That preschool has kids living in multiple school districts, and some districts were more responsive than others at covering those costs. Another district apparently had to be sued.

Theoretically vouchers may be available to all, but if a family can't cover tuition beyond the voucher, often all that can be had are sketchy private schools that may be worse than even bad public schools.

 

[indygirl99]

Eh school choice has been around since the 50's.

I and all six of my siblings attended catholic elementary and middle school on the public dime. First day of class and mid January we got a list from Mother Superior that we took to the public school and picked up the textbooks and supplies for that semester. The catholic school only went to grade 8 or we would have attended there for high school also. No tuition was paid for any students, the only requirement to attend was attending mass once a month.

2 of my children attended private school on the public dime also. One was special needs way before IEP's were a thing. She was bussed by the public school and all of her therapists were paid for by the public school along with a private duty nurse. The other was just to smart for his own good, way ahead of his peers and a challenge for the teachers to keep occupied in a class of 30 other kids. So they sent him to the private school where the class size was much smaller. 12-15 kids and the public school paid. I never paid a dime for either of these 2 private schools.

I actually paid more for my other 4 kids that went to the local public school.

One of the grandkids also goes to a private school on a voucher system and the school accepts the voucher as payment in full. The voucher is approximately 1/3 of the cost of tuition.

There is a lot that goes on in the public school system that most people are not aware of.

 

[QueenIsabella]

I've been following this thread with some interest, and I don't understand some people. How is more choice a bad thing? Ever? Competition helps everyone--or in this case, every school. If a public school is losing tons of students because of (vouchers, charters, homeschoolers, pick your poison), then they need to step up and compete. I don't buy that the charter schools, etc. cherry-pick the best students, although I can see where they get the students with the more involved, caring parents (generally--if it's done by lottery, the parents have to be concerned enough to enter the lottery).

As a country, we've been debating this for decades. Problem is, the kids in problem schools don't need an answer in 20 years--they need one NOW.

For people who are opposed to charters, vouchers, etc., I suggest taking a good, hard look at New Orleans. After Katrina hit, they needed to do something--NOW--to continue to educate their students. Now, something like 92% attend charter or private schools, because there simply wasn't time to rebuild the public schools, and wasn't time to bicker. New Orleans inadvertently provides a wonderful opportunity to look at revamping the public school system--what works, what doesn't. And I'm sure it's not perfect, they had a unique, urgent situation. But, we as a country can learn from their experience.

 

[Kenny1113]

I wish it were simply a matter of competition. I'm not saying I'm for or against a voucher system. But in our district it is simply a lack of funding. Our school district is amongst the largest in the state and our teachers make less than others in the state. Yes charter schools can cherry pick (at least in our area) because unlike public school they do not have to accept every child who wants to attend.

That being said perhaps with the threat of vouchers the public schools will re-evaluate this common core mess.