Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew H.
I agree with your description of the schools. What I don't understand is why you want to keep the status quo. These schools have *terrible* outcomes. It's why parents with means will do anything to get their kids out of them.
|
I just suspect that it's the communities that have the terrible outcomes, more so than the schools. Take a private school and swap it with an inner city school, leaving the students in place. You think the graduation rates would hold? Maybe. Private schools don't necessarily do a better job, though I'm sure some do, but they certainly
have an easier one (private school: "No formal education training? No problem!).
Beverly Hills doesn't have a lower crime rate than East LA because their cops do a better job. Eddie Murphy excluded.
As Tubemonkey points out, vouchers would also need to come along with increased government regulation, which is not unfair to ask of institutions receiving tax funds. The voucher would need to be based on the tuition of the target school, so that schools wouldn't be able to intentionally hike tuition in order to put up a class-barrier. With the government paying their salaries, their teachers should also be required to meet actual teaching certifications, which many private schools don't require. The fact that they've done well with a custom-tailored student body is no indicator of performance once their doors are flung wide open. As I stated, it isn't vouchers themselves I think are flawed, but if you're gonna do it, do it right.
Let's talk about books. Also I find it amusing that I'm debating people who I strongly agree with on issues in other threads, and the other way around. Group hug.