I was thinking about NCLB yesterday and a thought came to me. I could probably support it if the federal government made the program revenue nuetral to the pubic schools. That is, instead of removing the funds from the public schools, the govt. merely supports the private/parochial institutions that accept the new children. That way their precious faith based initiatives still get supported, but we don't further gut the already poorly funded public school system.

I know this removes the "incentive" for schools to perform better, but IMO that's bogus anyway.

Thoughts?

© MBM

Original Post
BTW - I probably didn't adequately explain my thinking. If NCLB is, as conservatives suggest, all about providing choice, then why should most children suffer to allow a few to go to better schools? Also, why harm children at all when the fact that they go to poor schools isn't their fault or of their doing?
Your re-thinking caused me to question whether I am being uncaring about the circumstance of those who chose not to take the voucher option.

Without the leverage to induce change, why would any other alternative be adopted? With or without the voucher option, the children who do not take that option are left with the same bad circumstance of bad admiistration, bad teaching, bad buildings, bad behavior, and no fix.

I still see the 'voucher option' as the preferred option to pernicious system of unionism, incompetence, selfishness, nepotism, and the propagation of a liability to the community.

PEACE

Jim Chester
MBM:

The Federal government has historically only provided about 7% of funding for public schools. These schools are operated typically by the municipal government. These governments are given a charter by the state. The state can take over these school systems if they are proven to fail at educating their students or if they become insolvent.

The Federal government doesn't take over the school systems and does not operate them (except for the DOD system).

The Federal government sets up GUILDLINES for these systems. As with most other federal mandates they use the carrot of FUNDING to force the school systems to comply with the mandates.


THE ONLY SCHOOLS THAT HAVE BEEN THREATENED WITH HAVING THEIR FUNDS REDUCED ARE SCHOOLS THAT HAVE SYSTEMATICALLY FAILED TO PREFORM. The "funding reduction" that you speak of IS ONLY THE FEDERAL FUNDING. The feds cannot force a school to close down due to lack of performance.

The "punishment" that you speak of upon these schools is to GIVE VOUCHERS TO THE PARENTS OF STUDENTS WHO WANT THEM, allowing them to ESCAPE THE FAILING SCHOOL and obtain education from another source.

This is an important notion MBM - ARE YOU FOR THE INTERESTS OF THE STUDENTS OR FOR THE SCHOOL SYSTEM?

What other service provider is allowed to give years of crappy service that is below the standard and demand that more good money be sent after bad for them to continue?

WHAT MOTIVATION DO THEY HAVE TO CHANGE FOR THE BETTER?

What if you web hosting company had outages everyday for a year? They then raise your monthly prices by 10% with promises to do better. At the end of another year - they still have outages and seek more funding. Do you figure that you would continue using their services?
quote:
Originally posted by Constructive Feedback:

The Federal government doesn't take over the school systems and does not operate them (except for the DOD system).


No one has suggested they do so.

quote:
THE ONLY SCHOOLS THAT HAVE BEEN THREATENED WITH HAVING THEIR FUNDS REDUCED ARE SCHOOLS THAT HAVE SYSTEMATICALLY FAILED TO PREFORM.


It appears that you are not aware that the funding associated with the children who leave the public schools goes with them. As I said, this reduces the support for the already ridiculously underfunded schools.

You would shove a garden hose down someone's throat who was drowning. td6

quote:
This is an important notion MBM - ARE YOU FOR THE INTERESTS OF THE STUDENTS OR FOR THE SCHOOL SYSTEM?


Vouchers reduces funding at public schools leaving them poorer and further gutting what precious little morale and "hope" that might be there. It pushes the better teachers away and generally increases the chances that the remaining students will be worse prepared for life.

All that to help a small percentage of children is nonsensical. Help me understand how on Earth you can conjure an argument for it.

quote:
WHAT MOTIVATION DO THEY HAVE TO CHANGE FOR THE BETTER?


Uh, some state and local governments care about their public schools systems. Some elected officials are held accountable for results in their schools. Some people actually give a shit.

quote:
What if you web hosting company had outages everyday for a year? They then raise your monthly prices by 10% with promises to do better. At the end of another year - they still have outages and seek more funding. Do you figure that you would continue using their services?


Dumb analogy. In the private sector the entire point is to create competition. Some services are deemed appropriate for the government to provide.

I don't hear you talking about privatizing the police function - we know its screwed up. Why not?
No Child Left Behind = No Billionaire Left Behind


All this is, is some bullshit meant to purge Minorities from schools under the label of "lower-scoring students". bs
MBM:

IF vouchers cause school funding to be reduced once these children depart the school then what say you about the drive by Rep Kendred Meeks to impose smaller class sizes upon public schools that will require many, many new schools to be constructed?

IF there are less pupils at these original public schools DO YOU FIGURE THAT THEIR FUNDING WILL BE CUT and thus YOU ARE IN STRONG OPPOSITION TO MEEK'S drive......RIGHT? (That is if you follow logic).
quote:
Originally posted by Constructive Feedback:

IF vouchers cause school funding to be reduced once these children depart the school then what say you about the drive by Rep Kendred Meeks to impose smaller class sizes upon public schools that will require many, many new schools to be constructed?


First who is Kendred Meeks. Funny that there are NO citations for that person in all of Google.

Second, most schools are built with a combination of local, state, and federal funding hence your assumption that building schools somehow reduces per student funding does not necessarily apply.

Third, even if per student funding decreased, lowering the teacher/student ratio in some instances might overcome the reduced funding. This is particularly the case when it is part of a planned, strategic effort to reduce class size and not of some mis-guided privitization effort.
quote:
Originally posted by MBM:
quote:
Originally posted by Constructive Feedback:

The Federal government doesn't take over the school systems and does not operate them (except for the DOD system).


I don't hear you talking about privatizing the police function - we know its screwed up. Why not?
quote:
First who is Kendred Meeks. Funny that there are NO citations for that person in all of Google.

DUMB-Feed must be referring to U.S. Rep. Kendrick B. Meek of the 17th Congressional District of Florida.



The Perpetually UNLEARNED have no shame.
CON-Feed should be the last person to ever say something about education and improving education in the Black Community when his LAZY tendencies or his willful ignorance when it comes to taking the nano-second to make sure he's spelling Meek's name right shows he has no such personal interest himself.
quote:
Originally posted by MBM:
...I know this removes the "incentive" for schools to perform better, but IMO that's bogus anyway.

Thoughts?


You are correct, sir. That whole competition argument is absolutely bogus! Private schools choose the students they want to accept into their institution, public schools take every child within their district, whether they speak English as a first language, regardless of their ability to buy their own lunch, uniform, or pay for their field trips, whether they are C students or make regular appearances on the honor roll.
i am of the opinion that children should be able to attend any school. if the school in your local district stinks you should have the option to have your child go elsewhere. however, i do not believe schools should be stripped of funding...

Add Reply

Post
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×