A Question About Highschools in the USA

[Deity Dude]

not all public school shave bus systems and many private schools do. Not to mention that a tutor in your living room isn't too hard to get to.

[Aeson]

Originally posted by Deity Dude
not all public school shave bus systems and many private schools do.

A private school that does not exist most likely does not have a bus system either. Driving 6 hours each to the nearest private school just isn't an option. (Neither would be riding a bus.)

Not to mention a tutor in your living room.

Those who were home schooled were taught by their parents. Even if there were some tutors in the communities I lived in, they certainly wouldn't have been able to teach more than a tiny percentage of the kids in the area.

[Deity Dude]

Originally posted by Aeson


A private school that does not exist most likely does not have a bus system either. Driving 6 hours each to the nearest private school just isn't an option. (Neither would be riding a bus.)



Those who were home schooled were taught by their parents. Even if there were some tutors in the communities I lived in, they certainly wouldn't have been able to teach more than a tiny percentage of the kids in the area.

Just because it wouldn't work in your community doesn't mean it wouldn't work in Detroit.

Detroit has many private schools with busses - I went to 2 of them. And I graduated. It like 30 or 40 other private schools in Detroit are closed due to lack of enrollment. So the infrastructure is there.

As for tutors - the going rate is between and $8 and $10/hr in your house. I know this because I have hired one this year for my son. She spends 2.5 hours a week in our house tutroing him in Spanish for $20. Honestly he learns more in the 2.5 then he does in the 5 hours at school.

So do the math. Michigan Public Schools require a minimum of 1017 hours per year. (This includes home room and study hall 1.25 hours out of a 6.25 academic hour school day (kids usually spend longer than that due to lunch hour)) So a tutor would be required for 5/6.25 * 1017 hours. That equals 814 hours of academics that public schools have in a year. At $10/hour - the high end - you would only need $8140 for in home schooling by 5 qualified individuals in thier particular area of expertise. (Remeber Detroit spends over $10,000/student) That leaves alot of extra money for even more education - and alot more time to study since there would be no commute.

I know that these ideas don't work for EVERYBODY but just because it doesn't work for EVERYBODY it doesn't mean that EVERYBODY should be forced to do something that doesn't work for the vast majority.

[Aeson]

You asked "Why do u feel people can get thier kids to a Public School but not a private school or even a tutor in thier own living room."

I gave a valid answer. Don't get your panties in a twist over it. Of course not everything works for everyone.

[Deity Dude]

Originally posted by Aeson
You asked "Why do u feel people can get thier kids to a Public School but not a private school or even a tutor in thier own living room."

I gave a valid answer. Don't get your panties in a twist over it. Of course not everything works for everyone.

I would imagine that if your kids went to one of the schools on that list that graduated under 50% you would live in a large enough area to have the alternatives I mentioned above.

[Aeson]

Drop-out rates in some rural areas aren't very good either.

[Deity Dude]

Originally posted by Aeson
Drop-out rates in some rural areas aren't very good either.

I am sure that is true - but the list I showed was the Top 50 School Districts.

And just because a solution for Detroit orBaltimore might not work in rural Iowa doesn't mean that Detroit or Baltimore shouldn't do it.

I never understood the "1 size fits all" mentality of the government.

[Aeson]

That's true. And it applies vs universal vouchers as well.

The problem with vouchers is there is not currently enough room in private schools (most of which are already rejecting applicants) to expect it to change much of anything for those already attending Public Schools. Kids going to Private Schools will have their tuition payed for by the state... and kids stuck in Public Schools will be stuck in Public Schools who's funding will decrease. Eventually, capacity may even things out more, but it's harsh to take money from the Public School system to fund the already privileged (educationally) Private School students.

Public Schools have to be addressed directly in the interim, even if we were to implement voucher systems. Private schools cannot handle the capacity overnight.

[DanS]

Two things...

Regarding public school funding, in varies substantially by jurisdiction. This is not bad. Funding is voted on. If the voters don't want to fund the education well -- or want to fund some education priorities while ignoring others, or want to lavishly fund education -- then that's their choice. Real estate values fluctuate accordingly. It's the same with other public spending.

Regarding school choice, DC is the vanguard of the charter school -- an expperiment about 10 years old. These are private institutions that are given charters by the public school system to teach students. They are given a set amount of money per pupil from the public coffers. Admissions are by lottery. It is projected that within a few years, over half of all DC schoolchildren will be in charter schools (6 years at current rates). This leaves aside the catholic parochial/college prep schools and the private schools. DC public schools are being closed in droves due to lack of students brought on, in part, on kids wanting to go to charter schools.

http://www.examiner.com/a-991742~Drop_in_public_school_enrollment_may_cut_federal_funding.html

DC also has a well-funded voucher pilot program for parochial/private schools.

[GePap]

Why is the uS so incapable of making public schooling work when plenty of other rich countries have public school systems that do work?

Are Americans simply incompetent when it comes to basics?

[Victor Galis]

Originally posted by Deity Dude
Who is taking. The school is paid for by money given to it by the people. You obviously fall into the trap that taxes are the government's money as opposed to money taken from the people.

Umm... it's money that they can only spend on schooling now. Also, it's money that comes from all tax payers not just the parents themselves. I fail to understand your point.

Second, this is just common sense. Who cares if the price of private school goes up to the amouint of the entire voucher. They sill graduate more than 22%and that is the real goal. People whoargue against this lose site of the goal. They prefer to protect a government institution at all costs including the welfare of dare I say "the children".

Well, if the cost goes up the cost of the entire voucher, the people who can't send their kids to private school, still can't send their kids to private school, and that public school has even fewer resources.

You sound like the typical big government liberal, if there is a problem in the private sector it needs more regualation, if there is a problem in the public sector it needs more taxes.

Vouchers are just another type of regulation. The government still taxes, and then gives back the money in a form that can only be spent on one purpose.

Please make excuses or defned the 22% graduation rate some more - I love it.

Why? The people who go to public school, still end up going to the public school. Vouchers don't solve the problem.

Why do u feel people can get thier kids to a Public School but not a private school or even a tutor in thier own living room.

School buses? Private schools being more expensive even post voucher?

would imagine that if your kids went to one of the schools on that list that graduated under 50% you would live in a large enough area to have the alternatives I mentioned above.

I went to school in GA

Why is the uS so incapable of making public schooling work when plenty of other rich countries have public school systems that do work?

The US also has more politicians who believe government will never work and then get elected to prove it. Coincidence? I think not.

[Deity Dude]

Originally posted by GePap
Why is the uS so incapable of making public schooling work when plenty of other rich countries have public school systems that do work?

Are Americans simply incompetent when it comes to basics?

Gepap what's the name of the utopian country you live in.

Most of America does fine. If you looked at the chart I put up you'd see the names. Detroit, New York Baltimore Chicago, Philadelphia, Los Angeles etc. America has an inner city problem.

Now here's the paradox I want everyone to consider.

In the suburbs and rural areas most people are against big government, get less money per person from the government yet they do fine.

In these big cities, they tend to vote for big government, have the highest pct of people depending on big government, yet big governemnt lets them down everytime.

Something like vouchers offers them hope for the next generation. They probably spend about $200-$300 in property taxes of which 15-20% goes to the school system yet, they could get a $10,000 voucher. What better deal could government give them. Certainly better than a school district that only graduates 22% of thier students. And, believe me, the ones that do graduate aren't 4.0 Phi Beta Kappa. Some are stil functionally illiterate. But they still think of private sector school and vouchers as a "republican thing" and therefore won't consider it. They hear the slogan "It Will Ruin The Public Schools"

How low does the graduation rate have to go in these areas before people will admit that the public schools are ruined.

18%

15%

12%

Nobody graduates because "we don't have enough money?"

[Deity Dude]

Originally posted by Victor Galis


Umm... it's money that they can only spend on schooling now. Also, it's money that comes from all tax payers not just the parents themselves. I fail to understand your point.

My point is it is the student's money not the public school's. The government collects it on behalf of the students and acts as a shepherd of it. This is because it is assumed they will do a good job, in fact, a BETTER JOB than you or I. I'm not complaining about paying for schools. I am complaining about paying $10,000/student for a 20% graduation rate.

I consider that a failure

[SIZE=1]
Well, if the cost goes up the cost of the entire voucher, the people who can't send their kids to private school, still can't send their kids to private school, and that public school has even fewer resources.

That sounds like the logic of someone who went to a Detroit Public School.

First of all if the ENTIRE TUITION is paid for by a voucher, AND there is an infrastructure better than the public school system's AND if that fails it is still less expensive than $10,000/student to have personal tutors in their home's - who couldn't find an alternative.

Did it ever occur to you why the Public Schools with a 22% graduation rate REFUSE to allow an alternative?

[SIZE=1]
Vouchers are just another type of regulation. The government still taxes, and then gives back the money in a form that can only be spent on one purpose.

I am not against regualtion if it makes sense. I am not against the government collecting money to insure young people are educated. I am against the government forcing you to make your child go to a school with a 22% graduation rate as opposed to letting you take your students money, in the form of a voucher, and finding an alternative. Remember this is money they collected on behalf of the students not the public schools.

[SIZE=1]
The US also has more politicians who believe government will never work and then get elected to prove it. Coincidence? I think not.

THAT IS THE MOST RIDICULOUS THING I HAVE EVER HEARD. 99.9% of politicians are pro-government just to different degrees. I havn't seen the Anarchy Party winning many elections. I am pro-governement even though I am a Libertarian. What we debate is what is the government better at than the private sector. Not whether or not a government should exist.

Just like this issue - I am not against the government collecting the money. I am not against them "offereing" a Public School alternative. I am against them condemning generation after generation of Detroit youth to poverty BY LAW because their system fails and the parents have no choice.

In most any field if you collect money from people to offer them a service and it only works 22% of the time you would get fired. Problem is, there is no fiing the Public School System in Detroit.

As a Libertarian I tend to look to government as a last resort but a legitimate one. To me the best situation is when government offers a service that competes with the private sector (i.e. the post office) but if government works I am ok with it. So, if someone can tell me how a 22% graduation rate works, I am for the current system.

[Victor Galis]

Originally posted by Deity Dude
Now here's the paradox I want everyone to consider.

In the suburbs and rural areas most people are against big government, get less money per person from the government yet they do fine.

In these big cities, they tend to vote for big government, have the highest pct of people depending on big government, yet big governemnt lets them down everytime.

I'll give you a hint: different types of people live in the inner cities than in the suburbs.

Something like vouchers offers them hope for the next generation. They probably spend about $200-$300 in property taxes of which 15-20% goes to the school system yet, they could get a $10,000 voucher. What better deal could government give them. Certainly better than a school district that only graduates 22% of thier students. And, believe me, the ones that do graduate aren't 4.0 Phi Beta Kappa. Some are stil functionally illiterate. But they still think of private sector school and vouchers as a "republican thing" and therefore won't consider it. They hear the slogan "It Will Ruin The Public Schools"

And what happens when that $10000 isn't enough to get into a private school. Sucks to be the guy that gets left behind in the underfunded public school, eh?

My point is it is the student's money. The government is a shepherd of it. This is because it is assumed they will do a good job, in fact a BETTER JOB than you or I. I'm not complaining about paying for schools. I am complaining about paying $10,000 a student for a 20% graduation rate.

I consider that a failure

And my point is vouchers or no, there's redistribution going on. Students are entitled to some fixed sum, they're entitled to an education. A voucher program can't guarantee that to everyone.

First of all if the ENTIRE TUITION is paid for by a voucher and there is an infrastructure better than the public school system's and if that fails it is still cheaper to have personal tutors in your home than the Detroit Public School System - who couldn't find an alternative.

Look, I understand your education sucked, but I'm just too tired to try to teach you basic economics. It's quite pointless to try to argue with you. I don't live in some magical fun happy land where private schools are affordable to all people all the time if only we gave them some voucher that's less than than the tuition charged by some schools currently.

THAT IS THE MOST RIDICULOUS THING I HAVE EVER HEARD OF. 99.9% of politicians are pro-government.

Have you seen Republicans campaign for office?

[GePap]

Originally posted by Deity Dude
Now here's the paradox I want everyone to consider.

In the suburbs and rural areas most people are against big government, get less money per person from the government yet they do fine.

Actually poor rural areas do not "do fine" when it comes to education, but that is another story.

In these big cities, they tend to vote for big government, have the highest pct of people depending on big government, yet big governemnt lets them down everytime.

Except that this is false. "Big government" in other countries does deliver quality education to urban students, so to say this as a generality is false. As for saying a lot of people depending on big government, this is also not that correct. After all, Urban areas esport tax revenue. NYC for example gets 11 billion less in services than it pays in taxes to NYS and the Feds. If anything, many small rural areas are highly dependent on government support because otherwise they would hardly be viable. This is of course an aside.

Something like vouchers offers them hope for the next generation. They probably spend about $200-$300 in property taxes of which 15-20% goes to the school system yet, they could get a $10,000 voucher. What better deal could government give them. Certainly better than a school district that only graduates 22% of thier students. And, believe me, the ones that do graduate aren't 4.0 Phi Beta Kappa. Some are stil functionally illiterate. But they still think of private sector school and vouchers as a "republican thing" and therefore won't consider it. They hear the slogan "It Will Ruin The Public Schools"

Except that there aren;t enough private schools to meet the demand, and unless you are going to force private schools to accept anyone and everyone, they can still chose what students they take. Maybe the parochial systems might take anyone, but they don;t have the facilities to replace public education, and of course, there is an issue with the State subsidzing parochial schools.

How low does the graduation rate have to go in these areas before people will admit that the public schools are ruined.

Nobody graduates because "we don't have enough money?"

Those school systems that do badly, urban or not, are the school systems that are forced to deal with general social issues that schools are not equiped to deal with.

Detroit has a 22% graduation rate. It also has rampant unemployment, large amounts of crime and broken homes. Therefore that school system has to deal with kids who are NOT in any real shape to do well in any endevour.

At best, a voucher system would remove a few students from non-broken families and send them elsewhere without fixing anything. Vouchers are not a fix, they are a way to ignore the real social issues that lead to inner urban school "failure."