It's morning in Wisconsin

[DGuller]

It is still quite limited in most states; however, the dam is about to break: Lousiana just passed a law that in two years will make all kids able to receive vouchers to escape the public education system.  That's right, a 100% voucher system.  I think you are going to see a lot more movement in that direction.  And given the record of the public education system in Louisiana it can only get better through competition.

Do you really think that communities where almost everyone is from a broken home, high school dropouts are a lot of the parents, crime rates are very high, etc. are going to suddenly produce great students? If you give those kids vouchers, you are going to need to open new private schools--there aren't enough existing private schools to take them, and in any event they wouldn't want those kids. I suspect a lot of the schools that will open are going to be much worse than the schools that currently exist.

Personally, I think it's a risk worth taking.  Our education system is so fucked up that something needs to change.  I don't have faith in public education systems fixing themselves, because they are unfortunately a textbook example of bureaucratic mismanagement.  The good public schools are typically public in name only:  they require the parents to live in suburbs with sky-high property taxes.

[alfred russel]

Personally, I think it's a risk worth taking.  Our education system is so fucked up that something needs to change.  I don't have faith in public education systems fixing themselves, because they are unfortunately a textbook example of bureaucratic mismanagement.  The good public schools are typically public in name only:  they require the parents to live in suburbs with sky-high property taxes.

We have a large underclass in this country and many parents are going to make sure their kids don't end up going to school with members of it. That may not be PC, but I think that will persist in whatever system we come up with.

[Habbaku]

the only employment in Jefferson City is state work.

Kinda makes you wonder why the city exists. Has everyone left yet?

Maybe they're not allowed to leave.   

[Berkut]

If they are much worse, they will fail. Nobody is going to send their kids to shitty schools that are worse than the alternatives.

It seems the primary driver of education achievement relates to a parent's education, income, and interest in the child's education, as well as the peer group of the child. The studies I've read about show that when you adjust for these factors, private schools aren't any better than public.

I don't think the intent of vouchers systems is to push to private schools.

The intent is to allow choice and competition. In many cases, vouchers are not going to take off. A good example is here in Rochester, NY. There are several private schools that have opened in the city to compete with the relatively crappy City of Rochester public schools.

But the suburbs of Rochester has some of the best putblic schools in the country - and I am not saying best compared to the crappy RCSD schools, but compared to other suburban, middle class schools across the country. So you aren't going to see much call for private schools here - the public schools are excellent.

Vouchers, at least in theory, are not about replacing all public schools with private, it is about giving parents enough choice that they can choose better schools, and hopefully force all the schools to do a better job at education.

So long as you concentrate at risk kids in certain schools, you are going to get really shitty schools.

Not true. Some schools with high risk populations do better than others, and some schools with low risk populations stink anyway.

Vouchers are meant to deal with the situations where the schools themselves are not doing the job with the demographics they have, not fix the demographic problem (which is, as you note, the driving indicator of individual student success).

At least now the schools that take the most at risk kids have standards and curricula set by the state with reasonably well compensated teachers.

So do charter schools, at least so far as curricula and standards.

I could see a lot of schools competing based on the level of day care services they provide rather than teaching standards. "We'll take your kid at 9ish, you don't need to pick him up until 6ish, we'll cover the food, never mind that the class sizes are enormous, the teachers are paid nothing, while the owner/principal takes home a mint." For a single parent without an education herself struggling to make ends meet, that may be acceptible.

Maybe. I think you are imagining a particular circumstance though, and then decrying the entire system based on a perceived "this could happen...".

What we DO know is that today in many schools, we see very uneven results, even across similar demographic lines. It seems to me that if you want things to change, you have the change them - doing the same thing and hoping for different results is sure to fail.

[DGuller]

Personally, I think it's a risk worth taking.  Our education system is so fucked up that something needs to change.  I don't have faith in public education systems fixing themselves, because they are unfortunately a textbook example of bureaucratic mismanagement.  The good public schools are typically public in name only:  they require the parents to live in suburbs with sky-high property taxes.

We have a large underclass in this country and many parents are going to make sure their kids don't end up going to school with members of it. That may not be PC, but I think that will persist in whatever system we come up with.

Yes, probably.  At the same time, is segregation by suburbanization more efficient?

[Berkut]

It is still quite limited in most states; however, the dam is about to break: Lousiana just passed a law that in two years will make all kids able to receive vouchers to escape the public education system.  That's right, a 100% voucher system.  I think you are going to see a lot more movement in that direction.  And given the record of the public education system in Louisiana it can only get better through competition.

Do you really think that communities where almost everyone is from a broken home, high school dropouts are a lot of the parents, crime rates are very high, etc. are going to suddenly produce great students? If you give those kids vouchers, you are going to need to open new private schools--there aren't enough existing private schools to take them, and in any event they wouldn't want those kids. I suspect a lot of the schools that will open are going to be much worse than the schools that currently exist.

Personally, I think it's a risk worth taking.  Our education system is so fucked up that something needs to change.  I don't have faith in public education systems fixing themselves, because they are unfortunately a textbook example of bureaucratic mismanagement.  The good public schools are typically public in name only:  they require the parents to live in suburbs with sky-high property taxes.

You know what is scary?

In Rochester, NY, it is pretty much how you are saying - the suburban schools are excellent, and taxes are very high to pay for them.

The city schools stink, at least as far as outcomes are concerned (standard urban problems, low graduation rates, poor college placement, etc., etc.).

However, the kicker is that if you look at how much money is spent per student, the city of Rochester spends more than any of the suburban schools, with the money being provided by the State and Federal governments as at risk aid. Of course, the RCSD hsa a lot more overhead, since it is a lot larger than the suburban districts.

I also think there is a matter of oversight - the suburban districts are held to pretty serious account by the suburban soccer moms and dads. We want to know where our money is going, and if we don't like it, why, we won't vote for that new bond to pay for whatever.

You get the feeling the city mostly spends their political energy fighting about union contracts and who they are going to buy books from and who on the school board is making what, or the latest scandal. It is really very sad.

[The Minsky Moment]

The idea that we should preserve the perversion of the democracy (not to mention the incredible expense) that public sector unions represent  . . .

Pretty strong words.  How exactly is democracy being perverted?

In our society, if groups of people want to pool capital and associate together for the purpose of operating a business enterprise, the law not only permits that but extends special protections and privileges to such group (like limited liability).  Thus - among other things - allows these different individuals to act with a single collective voice in their interaction with employees.

Since FDR, the US has given recognition to the rights of the employees to do the same thing - i.e. to bind themselves together as a collective for the purpose of interacting and negotiating with their employers.  And from the POV of the employees, the need and value and doing this is the same whether the employer is a private or public entity.  Why should an employee lose associational rights just because he or she happens to work for an enterprise ultimately run by the State of X as opposed to the shareholders of X, Inc?  If the only answer is the risk of corruption, then IMO Guller and Seedy have a point, and the same argument can be used to attack the raison d'etre of the corporate form, particular in the post-CU era.

[alfred russel]

Maybe. I think you are imagining a particular circumstance though, and then decrying the entire system based on a perceived "this could happen...".

I'm probably biased in that two family members teach/taught at "failing" schools. One teaches elementary school at a place where a significant number of students' parents are migrant workers that miss large portions of the school year, and often don't speak english very well (she speaks Spanish very poorly).

Another taught high school english, including shakespeare, at an inner city school (over 80% minority) where her students were, for the most part, illiterate, and there were some very interesting stories regarding discipline.

Neither situation is probably relevant to upstate NY.

[MadImmortalMan]

But the suburbs of Rochester has some of the best putblic schools in the country - and I am not saying best compared to the crappy RCSD schools, but compared to other suburban, middle class schools across the country. So you aren't going to see much call for private schools here - the public schools are excellent.

Although they did insist that I don't pronounce the t in often. I still don't.

[Berkut]

Maybe. I think you are imagining a particular circumstance though, and then decrying the entire system based on a perceived "this could happen...".

I'm probably biased in that two family members teach/taught at "failing" schools. One teaches elementary school at a place where a significant number of students' parents are migrant workers that miss large portions of the school year, and often don't speak english very well (she speaks Spanish very poorly).

Another taught high school english, including shakespeare, at an inner city school (over 80% minority) where her students were, for the most part, illiterate, and there were some very interesting stories regarding discipline.

Neither situation is probably relevant to upstate NY.

Certainly relelvant to urban schools in places like Rochester and Buffalo.

[derspiess]

If they are much worse, they will fail. Nobody is going to send their kids to shitty schools that are worse than the alternatives.

Well it is not like there is going to be more money for schools than before.  Somebody is going to end up in the shitty schools.

I think the long-term goal is to either close down the shitty schools or force them to compete and become less shitty.

[derspiess]

You know what is scary?

In Rochester, NY, it is pretty much how you are saying - the suburban schools are excellent, and taxes are very high to pay for them.

The city schools stink, at least as far as outcomes are concerned (standard urban problems, low graduation rates, poor college placement, etc., etc.).

However, the kicker is that if you look at how much money is spent per student, the city of Rochester spends more than any of the suburban schools, with the money being provided by the State and Federal governments as at risk aid. Of course, the RCSD hsa a lot more overhead, since it is a lot larger than the suburban districts.

I also think there is a matter of oversight - the suburban districts are held to pretty serious account by the suburban soccer moms and dads. We want to know where our money is going, and if we don't like it, why, we won't vote for that new bond to pay for whatever.

You get the feeling the city mostly spends their political energy fighting about union contracts and who they are going to buy books from and who on the school board is making what, or the latest scandal. It is really very sad.

I think the Cincinnati/Cincy suburbs divide pretty much follows that pattern, though my local school district in the burbs doesn't seem to have exorbitant property taxes and it is one of the best in the state.

My brother lives just a couple miles from my house but he is inside the city limits.  His son is set to start kindergarten next fall and they just took a tour of the school he's supposed to attend.  I think they're putting their house up for sale later this month

[MadImmortalMan]

Why can't they just send him to the other one? I thought Ohio kids could switch districts.

[Jacob]

Well, given what Alfred, derSpiess and Berkut have said about the demographics of suburban schools versus troubled urban schools, it seems to me that the urban schools are on the front lines of dealing with a number of the biggest social issues facing the US today. If a large part of the student body comes from difficult family situations, don't speak English, are from environments that devalue education, and/or are facing significant issues coming from poverty/ drug abuse/ nutrition etc, it seems that threatening to take away resources from schools with the most challenged student bodies would be counter productive; and isn't that what standards competition is about?

[derspiess]

Why can't they just send him to the other one? I thought Ohio kids could switch districts.

Nope, unless we (I & all the other people I know who moved out of the city when they had kids) are missing something.