Public Schools vs. Private Schools.

[The One and Only...]

You know, I'm rather suprised by the Reps. Whenever school vouchers are brought up, they are generally aimed at giving money back to those who don't go to through the public schools. You never see them aimed at ending the public school system in and of itself.

Let me ask you this. Would you be more inclined to support the elimination of public schooling if vouchers were aimed at the poor?

I will lay out a rough system:

- All public schools are eliminated.
- Taxes are lowered as a result of this; however, some of the money that went toward public schools is saved.
- Lower class families that cannot afford private schooling are given vouchers from the remaining pool of tax money that used to go toward public schools. These vouchers ensure that these families can afford schools.

If we accept that government is less efficient than market institutions, the gains are obvious: better results in education, but without sacrificing the needs of the less fortunate (see, I can be a nice guy).

Opinions?

[AChimp]

Yeah. What about dumb kids?

See, during the entire 13 years that I spent in public school, I saw lots of dumb kids. The kind of kids who just didn't want to be there, whether it was private or not.

You see, the main reason that it appears schools are doing bad is because of the rampant levels of dumb that are present in society. If you reduced the dumb people, only the smart people would be left, and they are the ones that do well on the standardized tests.

My Grade 12 English class ended up with a 60% average on the provincial exam because of all the dumb kids who failed. Now, did they fail because the teachers were bad? No, they failed because they didn't care about. Did the teachers do a bad job of motivating the kids? Maybe. That's hard to prove. They certainly looked like they were bending over backwards for them to me, but what can you do when someone doesn't show up to class anymore? Legally, there's no requirement to be in school once you're over 16.

All these dumb kids would just end up in private school under your system, and everything would still suck.

[Carnivore]

So long as every child is guaranteed a quality education, I wouldn't care if the schools were public or private.

There would most likely be enoromous disparity in the quality of education between the rich private schools and the poor private schools, however.

[The One and Only...]

Well, there already is an enormous disparity between rich public schools and poor public schools, so I don't see your point.

[AChimp]

How does a poor private school provide quality education that's better than public schools? That's what he's asking.

And you didn't respond to my question about the dumb kids.

[Zebra 3]

- It's worth noting the Canadian public (and some separate) school system is much better than its US counterpart for the simple reason that it gets adequate funding, while the US public school system does not.

- I just realized that The One and Only is a moron.

[Supafly345]

Well now you're equal.

[James]

Wait.

So, if we eliminate all the public schools, and make the private schools accessable to everyone, doesn't that make the private schools public schools?

[Drew Katsikas]

Originally Posted by The One and Only...

Well, there already is an enormous disparity between rich public schools and poor public schools, so I don't see your point.

Yeah, I would then propose a sort of socialist education system. Taxes for funding public schools are directly sent to the Feds. Here, they divy up the funding among the public schools, being sure that each intitution recieves equal funding depending upon student amount.

Example: Each student gets 9,000 a year, or something along those lines.

This, I think, is the only way you can truly say all people are born into equal opportunity in this country. That way, no matter if you're in Beverly Hills or Harlem, you get just as good of a public education. There's no excuse for the disparity between public schools.

Anybody else have a proposed solution for public education inequality?

[The One and Only...]

Originally Posted by AChimp

How does a poor private school provide quality education that's better than public schools?

First of all, how do you define a "poor" private school? In theory, vouchers could be given out so generously that even middle class or possibly upper class citizens would send their children to the same schools. That is the beauty of the voucher system.

I have never heard of a public school out-performing a private school in my entire life. Getting rid of public schools would only further their performance by making the field quite competitive. In the market, you need to efficient to compete; with governmental programs, you are already secure in your position.

Originally Posted by Walter Simand

It's worth noting the Canadian public (and some separate) school system is much better than its US counterpart for the simple reason that it gets adequate funding, while the US public school system does not.

Uh-huh. You might want to look up your facts. America is one of the top spenders on education, and it has worse results than many of the countries that spend less.

Originally Posted by James

So, if we eliminate all the public schools, and make the private schools accessable to everyone, doesn't that make the private schools public schools?

Technically no, because private schools do not have to accept everyone. They could, for all they want, exclude all blacks, jews, and gypsies. However, the odds of this happening are unlikely; it is, however, quite likely that schools specializing in different needs might arise. For example, a school dealing with those who require special education.

Originally Posted by AChimp

And you didn't respond to my question about the dumb kids.

I find it highly unlikely that we are going to be able to get rid of dumb kids. That doesn't mean that private schools are the same quality as public.

[derrida]

Originally Posted by The One and Only...

I have never heard of a public school out-performing a private school in my entire life.

Private schools have the option of ejecting students who do not meet their standards.

The most important task for the American school system is the abolition of social promotion. Students should be grouped according to mastery of basic material. Students who cannot meet specific requirements by age 13 should be enrolled in vocational education programs.

[Zebra 3]

Originally Posted by The One and Only...

Uh-huh. You might want to look up your facts. America is one of the top spenders on education, and it has worse results than many of the countries that spend less.

Yeah, keep comparing yourself to third world countries, you assclown. Meanwhile it was just announced last week by the new Ontario premier that the private school tax rebate scam implemented by the last premier (a fuckin' conservative dipshit like yourself) will be eliminated because it is nothing more than a tax break for the rich, and does nothing to add to the province's excellent public/separate school system.

[AChimp]

I have never heard of a public school out-performing a private school in my entire life.

My high school calculus class wrote a university level exam at the end of my Grade 12 year. Our average was just over 4.0 (slightly better than an A). The big private school here in Winnipeg got a B average.

Now, if private schools have such an advantage, why did a public school kick its ass? Maybe things just work differently up here in Canada.

Or maybe, you're focusing too much on ghetto schools full of DUMB KIDS. Compare a school in a middle-class suburban neighbourhood and see how they match up.

See, the private schools will almost always do better than a public school when you look at the big picture. Why? Because it costs money to go to private school, and the people who can afford it tend to be much more affluent than parents who send their kids to the prior mentioned ghetto school.

Middle-class families tend to be smarter than lower-class families. They read to their kids when they're little. They buy them educational toys. Many kids from lower-class families would rather be watching wrestling or drinking instead of being in class, because guess what Mommy and Daddy do all the time? Who's more likely to study harder, hmm?

Throwing money at a kid won't make him or her learn better, like you're proposing. Having a better teacher won't make them learn if they don't want to learn. Putting better technology in classrooms won't make them learn better if they have no desire to do anything in school.

Dumbn kids will just move into your new private school system, and bring those pretty 90+ averages down, making performance look like shit. And, to be valid, you can't just test the smart kids to see how well you're doing.

Technically no, because private schools do not have to accept everyone.

Oh ho! Now we find the secret to your system! Performance figures would increase because schools would be allowed to stack the deck! How absolutely pompous of you.

America is one of the top spenders on education, and it has worse results than many of the countries that spend less.

Maybe it's because, on average, Americans are stupider and more ignorant than everyone else in the world. What do expect your kids to be like, then? Monkey see, monkey do.

[The One and Only...]

Oh ho! Now we find the secret to your system! Performance figures would increase because schools would be allowed to stack the deck! How absolutely pompous of you.

There are easier ways to improve performance figures than that. Like making the tests easier. But any business has to consider all of the consequences of such actions.

Do you not realize that the beauty of private schools is that different ones will be founded for different needs?

Maybe it's because, on average, Americans are stupider and more ignorant than everyone else in the world. What do expect your kids to be like, then? Monkey see, monkey do.

Actually, some countries exclude their underachievers from taking the tests that determine such data. Also, our schools have switched from focusing on the intellectuals and moved into "No Child Left Behind."

Let me just ask you people this: do reject the idea that business is more efficient (i.o.w. more bang for the buck) than government? If you do, then we have found our ideological difference.

[Zebra 3]

It was proven in case study in the province of Alberta for instance that the public health care system offered better eye care (eg. exams, surgery) at a more affordable rate than its publicly funded private (for profit) counterpart.

And even though the case study clearly shows that the public system is better not only for the patient, but for the tax payer as well, Alberta Premier Ralph 'King' Klein has sworn to continue to promote the usuage of private alternatives because he's a fuckin' drunken fool, who's blinded my the same fucktard ideology as yourself.

[KevinTheOmnivore]

Originally Posted by derrida

Students should be grouped according to mastery of basic material. Students who cannot meet specific requirements by age 13 should be enrolled in vocational education programs.

Yeah, the problem with stupid ideas like this, aside from them being stupid, is that they are an ineffective way to judge the level children are at.

For example, the school district I work in sets very high standards forr K-2nd grade students, higher than those we had roughly 20 years ago or so. Kids are expected to know certain words, certain numbers, have a grasp on certain mathematic skills, etc. So teachers, feeling the crunch from these standards, teach for the tests. Kids are taught according to what it would take for these kids to pass.

So it's funny, the Austin Independent School District has really high standards of literacy for children in Elementary School, kids pass these so-called standards in math and english, but then most aren't at a 6th grade reading level by the time they reach middle school. Hmmm.....I wonder why? Could it be that the crunch from such high standards forces teachers to pander MERELY to those standards, thus neglecting other important aspects of the ciriculum...?

[AChimp]

Do you not realize that the beauty of private schools is that different ones will be founded for different needs?

No, I must not, apparently. What happens if there's a special needs kid, but a specialized school doesn't exist in the area? Send him across the country to go to school when he could have just as easily gone to the public school at the end of the block and had them hire a para for the duration of his school time?

Make the whole family move? Force a nearby private school to accommodate ONE (that's bad business practice, BTW)? Schools for retards won't crop up everywhere there's a retard, you know, and it's unfair to the families to penalize them for having retards by making them send their kids away.

Actually, some countries exclude their underachievers from taking the tests that determine such data. Also, our schools have switched from focusing on the intellectuals and moved into "No Child Left Behind."

Nice dodge. I wasn't talking about the standards testing in Buttfuckistan, I was talking about how most Americans are stupid.

do reject the idea that business is more efficient (i.o.w. more bang for the buck) than government?

Nope. Business is more efficient than governments, but nobody said government had to be 100% efficient. See, I think that there are somethings that are better left to government to control. That way, the greater good prevails, rather than the private interests of a few rich guys and their bank statements. Unity of Man and all that stuff, you know.

[The One and Only...]

Originally Posted by AChimp

No, I must not, apparently. What happens if there's a special needs kid, but a specialized school doesn't exist in the area? Send him across the country to go to school when he could have just as easily gone to the public school at the end of the block and had them hire a para for the duration of his school time?

Make the whole family move? Force a nearby private school to accommodate ONE (that's bad business practice, BTW)? Schools for retards won't crop up everywhere there's a retard, you know, and it's unfair to the families to penalize them for having retards by making them send their kids away.

In other words, your asking what happens if the demand isn't great enough. For one thing, do you honestly think that a special ed program would be enacted in a public school for one kid? I hope not. For the second, do you think that is even remotely probable? For the third, you don't think that some of the established schools in the area might come up with a small special ed program for more profit?

Nice dodge. I wasn't talking about the standards testing in Buttfuckistan, I was talking about how most Americans are stupid.

I don't think I need to hear about stupidity from a Canadian. BRING IT!!!

Nope. Business is more efficient than governments, but nobody said government had to be 100% efficient. See, I think that there are somethings that are better left to government to control. That way, the greater good prevails, rather than the private interests of a few rich guys and their bank statements. Unity of Man and all that stuff, you know.

THE INVISABLE HAND IS ALL!!! WOO WOO WOO!!!

[The One and Only...]

Originally Posted by Walter Simard

It was proven in case study in the province of Alberta for instance that the public health care system offered better eye care (eg. exams, surgery) at a more affordable rate than its publicly funded private (for profit) counterpart.

And even though the case study clearly shows that the public system is better not only for the patient, but for the tax payer as well, Alberta Premier Ralph 'King' Klein has sworn to continue to promote the usuage of private alternatives because he's a fuckin' drunken fool, who's blinded my the same fucktard ideology as yourself.

Do you think that better eye care in Buttfuckistan, CA, validate a system in and off itself? NO!!! You, my friend, need to look at the whole picture.

Let's look at the Canadian system versus the American system.

Even Canucks cannot deny the technological shortage, hospital bed shortage, and slower responce for emergency care.

Moreover, you cannot deny that the myth of high drug prices is precisely that... a myth.

In other words, come back when you have some real statistics, not your little one example.

[derrida]

Originally Posted by KevinTheHerbivore

Yeah, the problem with stupid ideas like this, aside from them being stupid, is that they are an ineffective way to judge the level children are at.

For example, the school district I work in sets very high standards forr K-2nd grade students, higher than those we had roughly 20 years ago or so. Kids are expected to know certain words, certain numbers, have a grasp on certain mathematic skills, etc. So teachers, feeling the crunch from these standards, teach for the tests. Kids are taught according to what it would take for these kids to pass.

So it's funny, the Austin Independent School District has really high standards of literacy for children in Elementary School, kids pass these so-called standards in math and english, but then most aren't at a 6th grade reading level by the time they reach middle school. Hmmm.....I wonder why? Could it be that the crunch from such high standards forces teachers to pander MERELY to those standards, thus neglecting other important aspects of the ciriculum...?

Perhaps a battery of standardized tests is an inefficient measure of progress, but surely you see the folly in promoting a student simply because they spent a year in a classroom.

[AChimp]

In other words, your asking what happens if the demand isn't great enough. For one thing, do you honestly think that a special ed program would be enacted in a public school for one kid? I hope not. For the second, do you think that is even remotely probable?

Well, that just goes to show how much you know about the subject matter you're shooting your mouth off about. YES, THEY WILL ENACT SPECIAL PROGRAMS FOR ONE KID.

For the third, you don't think that some of the established schools in the area might come up with a small special ed program for more profit?

More profit... more profit... hmm... well, considering all the extra investment that teaching retarded kids takes... teachers, paras, equipment, drool mats... well, let's just say that there would have to be a helluva lot of retards to make even a small special ed program profitable. You obviously never attended a school where they taught special needs kids, huh?

Where a normal parent might be paying a few thousand per year per kid for schooling, a parent of a retard could pay 10x that.

But now, why would all the schools set up small special ed programs, when there is a limited number of 'tards in any given region? Hell, why would even SOME of them do it? You only need one.

But wait! Some of them might be more efficient at it, and could therefore do it cheaper! Put all the retards there! ... But then all these other schools are being inefficient and wasting valuable money that OTHER parents have given them for the education of THEIR children. Woe! The dollar figure has plummetted and the quality of education is suffering! Outrage!

So, now only one school in the area is teaching retards... OMG! A monopoly on retard education! I smell a conspiracy! There must be a better way! Someone should compete with this school! I demand that there be more options for my retarded kid when it comes to teaching him how to blow his nose!

Yeah right.

Moreover, you cannot deny that the myth of high drug prices is precisely that... a myth.

Yes... which is precisely why Americans keep wanting to buy prescription drugs from Canada.

[Perndog]

I for one think public schools are adequate. I went through my 13 years in public school and came out with a pretty fair education for my age. And I did eventually manage to shuck off most of the bullshit they fed me, though it took me until this summer to lose a lot of it, and I'm still working on it.

BUT.

Any parents of reasonable competence (about the 50th percentile in America..everyone else let the kids out of the house so they don't turn out as stupid as you are) should homeschool their children, because that way 1) they can ensure the kids learn the values the parents want, and 2) the kids will generally be better off regarding academics since their curriculum will be specifically tailored. To address the inevitable "homeschooled kids don't learn social skills" argument: if this were to actually catch on--even though it won't--with more and more kids being taken out of public schools, there would be more and more incentive for other social outlets (private sports leagues, music clubs, etc.) to spring up to cater to them.

This won't actually happen, but I don't feel the need to address the rest of the education system if I've already made a decision for my children. The only thing that I honestly think should and could change is that homeschooling parents should get tax breaks if their kids can demonstrate test scores that meet or exceed the public school averages. Only seems fair.

[FS]

One and Only, what's your plan to prevent bad and poor students from being excluded from all the best private schools and thus ending up in the cheapest, worst private schools? I'm assuming you're not denying stupid people a basic education.

[Zebra 3]

Originally Posted by The One and Only...

Let's look at the Canadian system versus the American system.

Even Canucks cannot deny the technological shortage, hospital bed shortage, and slower responce for emergency care.

Moreover, you cannot deny that the myth of high drug prices is precisely that... a myth.

In other words, come back when you have some real statistics, not your little one example.

According to Illinois state Gov. Rod Blagojevich, Canadians pay 30% to 50% less (some as high as 80%) for prescription drugs, and has even organized an ONLINE PETITION which asks the US Congress and the FDA to allow Americans to purchase their prescription drugs from Canada.

As for your link is concerned, its from a Libertarian site, which we all know are a bunch of screwballs, and secondly, their Canadian references are based on two Frazer Institute studies, which is nothing more than a pathetic ultra-right wing think-tank which most Canadians don't know, or trust, or give a shit aboot.

Here's some more stats: There's an 80% probability that you're a trailer park Republican, 15% that you're nothing but an I-Mockery satirical character, 4.5% that you're one of Vinth's bum buddies, and exactly 0.5% chance that you are Vinth, weeping in some drafty public library.

[Vibecrewangel]

For one thing, do you honestly think that a special ed program would be enacted in a public school for one kid? I hope not.

I worked for the special ed program in my area. Severely handicapped and autistic children. Guess what....districts are REQUIRED to have at least one school that has a program for special needs students. The district pays for the transportation of these students to and from the school if the parents can not transport the child themselves. Most districts have more than one school that has a special ed program. I supported 6 schools in my district that had programs for children grades prekindergarten - 12.
So yes, that one little student would be taken care of. With private schools there is no gaurantee of that being done.