Privatizing Public Schools

Would explain what you've tried to say above?

They could, and maybe even raise the standards, but would lowering their standards attract more enrollment or less?

 

More an inquisition wouldn't you say? I'm not hung up on the wealth of others or their religious beliefs or non-beliefs, simply educating our children to the best of their abilities for the least cost, allowing us to spend money where needed most and reduce with intent to eventually eliminate our debts. Nothing more, nothing less.

A voucher, a coupon redeemable for a fixed amount for each school age child, to be used by a non-public school system to obtain that amount of funding for each student enrolled.

That could be open to more discussion, but economic income is irrelevant as by law education is to be provided to ALL our children.

All social programs by definition lower the tax rate for those who make use of them.

More taxes if voters elect politicians who want to raise the taxes to provide greater funding for education purposes.

A basic education is what they should be required by law to provide in order to exist.

Taxpayers, not public schools, subsidize everything government spends our tax money on, and much of government spending is with private sector businesses.

They apply for acceptance.

Of course they use public school buses, or if parents wish they can drive them.

If private schools are going to compete with public schools, the best way is to provide the same or better education, along with other environmental improvements at a lower cost than public schools.

Depending on the school, it could be all or most.

I'm way too old, but perhaps someone younger might do so.

Poor budgeting?

And it needs to be spent more wisely, efficiently, and eliminate some, if not all of the waste and corruption.

The problem is that we try to solve a multitude of similar and even totally different problems with a single solution. Some school districts are debt free, and others are deeply in debt.

There is no single formula, and the best solutions to the problems that exist should be sought beginning at the local level of government.

We give grants for what purpose?

All funds for spending by government come from taxpayers, both present and future. And is additional funding needed, or simply better budgeting and reduction of waste and unnecessary spending?

Do we really need additional educational money? Most European nations, actually ALL of them looking at the list spend much less on education per student than does the U.S., and are they being educated more poorly than American students?

How about providing some figures for similar positions of private school administrators?

Are you claiming that private schools do not allow freedom of expression or speech? Let's deal with facts rather than insinuations.

Which regs are you referring to? Some regs, such as minimum course curriculum, as I stated previously should be mandatory. Have you a particular reg in mind?

Those we are educating are members of the public, it matters not where their education is obtained, private school, public school, or religious school, only that they are educated to the best of their abilities. And after finishing school and becoming taxpayers they provide funding for the following generations of students to obtain what they were provided.

The first order of funding for education purposes comes from local taxes where property is assessed a school tax, with additional funding coming from the general tax funds as determined by budgeting at the State and Federal governments.

 

inquisition: a period of prolonged and intensive questioning or investigation.
That's all I meant.

I didn't say that, but I do believe competition is the most powerful force in producing desirable results at the lowest cost.

As I understand, each State has adopted laws making education compulsory, beginning at age 5-8 through age 16-18, depending on the State. Education should, in my opinion be the responsibility of local government in compliance with their States laws, and the primary funding should be at local government level for the sole purpose of education. Shortfalls in school funding should next fall on the State government, which taxes with no direct intent of where money collected is to be spent, but instead budgets based on the needs that exist. The Federal government essentially does the same. At the local level, people can democratically exercise how their education taxes are spent, eliminating or allowing private or religious schools if they desire. That said the States can and should step in to assist where they find necessary, Ideally, the Federal government would not enter the picture at all, except in the case where the Constitution is being violated.

Each State makes education compulsory, and the tax money collected for education is done at the local level so the people paying a school tax should have the say as to how they wish their school taxes spent.

Depends on what you wish to call discrimination. If applicants to a private school do not meet their admission standards, they are free to find a private school that has lower standards, or work to meet the more stringent standards and reapply.

Does not basic curriculum cover what must be taught? Discipline, is necessary, and are you suggesting private schools might resort to torture if not regulated? Rules for admission and expulsion are necessary for a proper teaching and learning environment. I never said I wanted more funding by government, and think that over time less government funding from State and Federal government would be necessary as the price of educating our children would be reduced and improved, if not only due to an improved environment, but due to greater competition as well. Yes this is a form of socialism, but one of the few I find acceptable, and if under control of local government rather than State or Federal people can move to where they find others who think the same.

In order to exist private schools would have to provide the same education at lower cost, or a better education at the same cost. I don't want our childrens education to be an arm of the government, but instead of the community.

I think that the local community should provide most, if not all the costs of educating the students within the area members are assessed a school tax. And as State governments are the source of making education compulsory they should make up any shortfalls. Maybe you should start a drive for a Constitution amendment to make all religions illegal in the U.S. If religious people want to enroll their children in religious schools, so what as long as they're being taught the basic curriculum being taught in non-religious schools as well.

I think there is waste and mismanagement in government, more so at State and most of all at the Federal levels, and would like to reduce thier involvement as much as possible in the role of education, leaving it more to people at the local level of government, where voters are more likely to have access to their elected government officials, and replace them more easily when found necessary.

I agree.
And how about all of them? And making this lengthier leads to shorter answers. It seems that nearly each sentence could evolve into a thread of its own.

 

Part II

More choices allow more solutions. The money is going to be spent no matter what, so why not demand desirable results and allow people to decide who and where, private, public, religious, vocational, or something else is best in providing their wants and needs?

Don't you think we've got more on our plate than we can resolve already? Do we need all of them to begin with?

That's true of the U.S. as well, we're comparing many different societies in each of the States as well.
I want as little government involvement in private schools as possible.

 

"play by their own rules"

Many, many years ago, I looked in applying for a teaching position @an exclusive private grade school (K thru 8) in the area. Me w/ my public school edu. & degree from a state U.

I was astounded to find that teachers didn't need a college degree @this place. Administrators were more interested in hiring alumni of the school than in hiring anyone w/ a degree in edu. or in some academic subject area.

Am. edu. is becoming just another arena of exclusivity: the voucher gig makes it evident. Reminds me of Sartre's comment from long ago: the professor's job is to eliminate students. Now it's also the job of the grade school & high school instructor.

 

Public competive armies seem to have become less capable of actually winning wars since we have not actually won a war since Japan unconditionally surrendered.

The governments part being funding vast amounts of tax dollars and borrowed money.

Why, and why not?

I don't want the State or Federal government to intervene, but when their constituents allow them to make laws mandating compliance, then State and/or Federal government become responsible for assisting in the funding to achieve compliance, redistributing tax money, and debt responsibility to individuals and States nation wide.

I only want public choice as to which private enterprise they give their support.

If government didn't take the money in the first place it wouldn't have it to give.

I fully understand that they operate under different conditions, which requires them to provide and environment and produce results that attract students in order to remain in business.

You would first have to explain how you see them avoiding the Constitution.

It's not clear what view you are talking about.

First find a job in a district that provides good schools.

Certainly they should be left alone, to wither on the vine, if they cannot compete, but since all citizens pay taxes, and State governments have made education compulsory, school age children, as defined by each State have a right to acquire an education, and the States have a duty to provide the necessary funding when local governments within the State cannot do so alone.

Me, run around in circles? Reduce and/or eliminate Federal taxation as much as possible. Return government to the people, allowing them to dictate to their State governments what they are willing to be taxed to provide them. Local governments tax and spend in order to provide within the laws of the State, with State funding assistance to produce greater equality between areas of differing prosperity. Read the 16th and 17th amendments, which I think should be repealed and would go a long way towards fixing most of the problems that have only grown over the last century.

You obviously have not understood a word I have written.

Taken from private citizens?

I was wondering how long 'amicable' would last.

 

Already, there have been many cases of charter schools being caught teaching religion on the taxpayers' dime. If ever there are thousands of charter schools, there will be no way to police the damn things.

Charters and vouchers are both loved by the Catholic hierarchy. That says a lot

 

I agree with your last sentence. Yes, each of us is free to believe as we wish, but wouldn't it be much nicer if we didn't constantly try to impose our beliefs on each other collectively and nationally?

 

Would the public know how to fairly compare school A with school B, if both private-charter schools are operating on different standards for success? At best it would be one more complexity for parents to figure out, on an already busy work week for most families. The standards are a key factor for why and where their kids will attend a school.

Elementary/Basic school is more easily standardized, given that you have 1 teacher, who teaches the core subjects of basic math (adding, subtracting, multiplying, and dividing, along with the Order of Operations), reading and writing.

But when you get to the jr. high school, or even high school level you got all these different subjects, and a few elective options, and some of those subjects, like the unit about evolution within biology classes or sexual education in health classes, are highly controversial in this country and could face a lot of opposition by regional areas of the USA.

Having a fractured national populace in terms of education, doesn't work for the health of the nation.

Over time I could see lots of corporations specializing in education that end up becoming like the top 5 corporations in education, and I can see them cutting corners and throwing their weight around in an abusive way, in the name of profit, and imagine if they decide to have shareholders, which legally as the law stands, they would have to put first even above the product, which in this case is education.

Then you have the potential for niche, private schools to pop up, with voucher support who might be pushing racist or sexist ideals, and have enough money to be in existence, and do well enough, and just fester.


Because they're "private" entities, Brown v. Board of Education, wouldn't apply to them, neither could any local, state, or federal government call out on them for wrong doing in these areas, because the school's "policy" would be considered "free speech, and freedom of expression" under the 1st Amendment.

And given the gridlock in Congress, it is unrealistic to expect changes in the U.S. Constitution, so for discussion sake we should talk about the pros/cons of this subject with what is most likely going to happen if they go into effect with the proposals both political parties have put on the table thus far.

---

Now what should happen on the public front is that local governments should be talking to each other nationwide, statewide and capping the salaries and # of positions for school district administrators, teacher salaries should be raised and lowered based on performance and peer review in exchange for how K-12 tenure works currently, the A-F letter grading system needs to be updated with more accurate and detailed system of where individual students are breaking down in their learning, and hopefully we can identify differences between those that are lazy students and those who truly are trying and possibly are suffering from learning challenges or a bad home situation (hunger, poverty, and other negative family stressors).

 

Although you point out the potential for negative consequences, competition in my opinion provides much greater potential for positive consequences as a result for both parents and students who wish to be able to exercise a choice in obtaining the best education possible. In free societies, learning to make the best choices based on availability is one of the most essential components of a good education. If private schools are free to compete with one another, and local government, parents and students aregiven the strongest voice in their operations, both schools and teachers would be made more directly accountable for the results they produce.

 

True, but in practice it ends up becoming that because the cost of legal battles for teacher unions intimidates many school districts and principals from removing bad teachers because their budgets are so constrained to meet no Child left behind standards. So they keep the bad teachers and in the job until they retire.

That why I said peer review and salary incentives together.

Also at the federal level there should be an economic education stimulus bill and at the state government there should be one as well in addition to parts of law that will make taxes go through less bureaucratic process and go straight to the schools for specifics like updating old moldy buildings, safety, disabled student services budget and homework help services outside the classroom like tutors, and private-public partnerships for job shadowing and applied knowledge.

 

No child left behind scheme...is this serious?
Because once they leave school and can't find a job they're unfortunately left behind, no?

 

I pretty much agree with what you've said above. A large number of us dropped a college course once because the 'tenured' Professor had not kept up with the changes that took place since he was educated, and was teaching nothing, but simply reviewing what most everyone already knew, and was obsolete.

 

The ultimate promoter of progress is not competition, but the desire to see progress.

Competition is the egoistic way of the animal brain, and man is a higher animal who should finally learn to live with himself in the form of the other.

A society founded on competition and bloodshed will never be at peace with itself.