This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »
Education "vouchers" solve the fiscal crisis, and also lead to economic recovery?
Simply open up K-12 education to the market place, with government only playing a role by financing the students with a yearly education check of $8000.
*www.usagovernmentspending.com shows American local governments spending $458.3 billion for K-12 education in 2012.
*(Sir Ken Robinson says this education system is a complete failure)
*The new education cost of $8000 education check to 50 million K-12 students is $400 billion per year
*This saves $58.3 billion
*(a $6000 check would save $158.3 billion)
*The yearly education check allows students(and their parents) to choose how, when, where, and what they learn, and also who teaches them
*The yearly education check of $8000 opens up a $400B/year market to entrepreneurs, teachers, and creatives
*($6000 check opens up a $300B/year market to entrepreneurs, teachers, and creatives)
State fiscal crisis solved, federal fiscal crisis solved, and the new education market leads America's economic recovery.
Thoughts everyone?
Alan Russell
Petar Ivanov
"where I live and teach, people would beat you to death if you suggested taking away their football program, even if it has never won a game"
Education cuts across America are targeting the athletic programs, and vouchers present an opportunity for football:
Fletcher High School's football program under public schooling:
-ticket sales +$90,075
-program advertisements and donations: +$15,700.
-Cash in: +$105775
-Program cost: -$76,700
-coaches' pay: -$33,856
-security costs: -$10,768
-Cash out: -$121,324
Total: -$15,549.
Fletcher High School's football program scenario under $8000 vouchers:
-30 Football players x $8000: +$240,000
-ticket sales +$90,075
-program advertisements and donations: +$15,700
-Cash in: +$345,775
-Program cost: -$76,700
-coaches' pay: -$33,856 -security costs: -$10,768
Cash out: -$121,324
Total: +$224,451
So the students and parents have $224,451 for the 30 athletes to pass education requirements, spend on football, pay other people to take their exams. At $100/hr, they have 2,244 hours of group tutoring to pass exams. They could play football all day 8pm-3pm, then do education at night. With 4-5 hours of practice every day they might win more games.
Numbers from:
http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/2009-07-13/story/high_school_football_makes_money_but_not_enough
Some additional guesses:
-Parents and students directly responsible for payment, which increases donations and more involvement from families.
-Parents and students will be better at advertising, ticket sales, and other revenue generation methods because of the increased responsibility and involvement.
-Coaches will be much more involved in the education, even teaching classes. And because athletes work much harder for their coach than they do for their math teachers, athlete education improves.
-With athletes removed from normal classes, the nerdy kids they push around have a more enjoyable education experience.
Petar Ivanov
If a family figures out how to educate their children for $1000, and the father spends the rest at the bar, that innovative father's techniques can be spread through the community. Now fathers already do this with income they earn rather than spending it on education their children. With vouchers, however, children have aces up their sleeves: their mother, their grandparents, their friends, their friend's parents, parental abuse hotlines, church members, charity, and social pressure from the community. And with vouchers, charities and churches would likely spend more time and effort addressing the issues too. These aces for children do not exist in the current education system because it is a government monopoly run by bureaucrats. With that said, isn't it fair to the dedicated parents homeschooling their kids to give them money that their student would otherwise consume going to a public school?
1. What % of American parents do you think would cheat their own children out of an education?
2. Who would sacrifice more for your a child's education and are also in a better position to help them succeed?
A. The mother and father
B. Politicians and government officials
3. Who is more likely to more effectively spend government money on improving the lives of a child?
A. The mother and father
B. Politicians and government officials
All the education options will not prepare students equally, as students and parents have different talents, efforts, and interests. What can be guaranteed is that students will not be forced to go to a school assigned by zip code, that students have choice, that politicians are removed from taking salary out of the education budget, that politicians are removed from forcing textbooks and curriculum, that teachers compete for money from students and parents, and that responsibility is put into the hand of the people.
DjcandYamanda Hilton Hilton
DjcandYamanda Hilton Hilton
Now this is my blog, I speak for out world love, music, creativity, poetry, dance, economy as a whole
Charles Rein
Reading and Math skills of some of the students any opportunity for improvement above the current system is necessary.
I went to Private Catholic schools at a time when discipline in schools meant something, and while my performance was average due to lack of effort, the class setting was not disrupted by anyone. The Upside was that my Peer group was College Prep focused and we did not spend time on continuous remedial learning.
I left Central NY where the class standards in my school and the public school in that area were that 90% went on to college. I NC where I now live, the counselors and Teachers were proud that the had college placement in the 60% range.
I have been a Self Employed Professional Technical Recruiter, and the High Schools are allowing and encouraging Student to study for skills that have little or no demand...I am sorry but History (I love) but no jobs, English, Teaches in the Northern States, and other areas.
A comment about the Poor and having to find there way to school. If there are vouchers and money to be made, charter schools will open in areas near them. Pay good teacher more and more people will teach.
Petar Ivanov
How do you feel about the science education at the Catholic school compared to the public ones?
Charles Rein
The All around education in Catholic Schools was superior...There has been a dumbing down with the Group learning concept taught today, what that means is that the smart person in the group is stalled by helping his group learn because they don't pay attention or do their homework.
In Catholic HS we had 4 years of Science, so even being an average student you would have far more learning than most kids when you went to college. My same age neighbor who went to Public school had to take a semester of remedial courses to even qualify in the Local Community College.
But we also suffered with bad teachers, (Brothers of the cloth) who continue to teach when they can't. My 3rd year algebra/trig teacher, had a 60+% fail rate for 5 classes. He would spend so much time on answering remedial questions, that we didn't get the work done. And the math for 3rd year is important for Chemistry...I ended up in summer school, and actually got good teachers in the public school
Petar Ivanov
I have never understood the group learning, weak link, no child left behind mentality. I think education services would benefit from a "no child left unchallenged" mentality.
So your Catholic school has four years of science, and better science teaching than the public school...I was reading that public school science laboratory education is stifled by rules, regulations, and liabilities. Did your Catholic school also have too-dangeous-for-public-schools hands on science and chemistry laboratory experiments?
Another great thing that has been proven in a multitude of voucher studies is that parents become much more involved with and feel responsible for their child's education. Vouchers put money and choice into the hands of the students and parents which makes them responsible for education. Put money and choice into the hands of the government and people come welfare/entitlement/slaves of the state.
The research is here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VTbMJtQL5ew
Brock Hardwood
How are the poor going to come up with the remaining $12,000 per year per child for a private school, given that the average private school costs $20K per year, and the really good ones can cost as much as $40K per year? Public schools cost a fraction of that cost with similar results.
The ONLY thing that has been shown to have a real impact on academic success is parental involvement. That can happen with either choice, public or private. You guys talk about 'parental choice', yet conveniently forget that 'parental RESPONSIBILITY' has a much greater impact.
http://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/06/22/private-school-tuition-hits-the-stratosphere-40-000-per-year/
It's pretty tough for for-profit companies to compete with not-for-profit organizations when both can implement the same innovations.
Alan Russell
How do you handle travel distance at all? Are the students farther away from a diserable school out of luck because of location? Or will there no longer be any such thing as a neighborhood school; will all scholls be open to all students? If no school has a designated attendance area, then who gets to attend the highest-performing schools which will probably have far more applicants than spaces?
What about the special needs students? Will those families get extra voucher money to pay for the aides and other expenses their children require, or will schools require everyone else to subsidize those costs? Also, the way No Child Left Behind works, schools are penalized for their special education students. No matter how great a school might be in meeting the needs of its disabled students, those with mental disabilities hurt the school's rating, driving away voucher-wielding parents from an otherwise excellent school.
This may be a minor consideration, but at the high school level, how will vouchers affect athletics? Will a school be able to recruit better athletes, as colleges do? High school athletics are great for unifying a community and creating a sense of community where one does not exist.
On a separate note, I don't like the assumption that every teacher at a "bad" school is a bad teacher. Closing a poorly-performing school ignores the teachers doing good work (few though they may be).
Arkady Grudzinsky 50+
Despite my skepticism that public schools are the only way to provide education, these are serious issues to address.
Frequently, private schools have higher ratings than public schools not because they are better in any way, but because they select high-performing students. Special needs students and students with behavior problems are simply pushed out. I know this from personal experience.
Petar's Placeholder
Petar Ivanov
For Allan,
20 years of voucher research has shown the people who benefit most from vouchers are the poor and minorities. The middle class also benefit enormously, and the benefit to the rich is much less.
An older poll from 2000 when vouchers were less popular showed that 87 percent of African-American parents aged 26 to 35 supported vouchers. Voucher programs and support are strongest in poor inner cities. A senate testimony elaborating on the voucher studies and research methodology:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VTbMJtQL5ew
Also, unrestricted vouchers open up education to every service imaginable. Tutoring, apprenticeships, internships, home schooling, online schooling, night school, daycare, YMCA, attending community college. Which means that education becomes more than just the domain of schools. If 20 students from the same apartment block put their $8000 together, they have $160,000 to hire tutors at $40/hr to show up at their house to educate them for 4000 hours. Transportation, how about an innovative educators converting 5th wheel trailer into mobile classrooms and picking up the students to make his service offer more attractive for the parents and students holding the voucher money?
The inner cities also have hundreds of charity services ready to educate the children, the charities have no market for education because of rules, regulations, and students being mandated to go to public school at certain times and places due to zip codes. And people who made it out of the inner city poverty cycle, vouchers open a market to them so they can earn big money going back and teaching --- they attract 40 students, $320,000 in revenue.
Petar Ivanov
So what happens is the public school sets a price equal to the voucher, and the parents and students pay that price to attend the school.
This is a simple change to the funding model:
-instead of education funding coming top-down through politicians,
-the education funding comes bottom up through the students and parents paying teachers or schools directly.
So for transportation and food concerns, if parents decide to continue sending their child to the public school, the infrastructure, transportation, and food services are already there.
Consider the statistics Robert Winner just posted for his home state of Arizona:
https://www.ted.com/conversations/15730/why_does_us_education_cost_so.html
1a. 1,077,831 K-12 students
1b. $7,931 per student
1c. $8,554,744,647
2a. 51,947 teachers
2b. $$44,642 per teacher salary
2c. $2,319,017,974
$6.2 billion dollars missing.
Another:
3a. Average classroom size is 25 students.
3b. $9,000 national cost per student, $225,000 per class
3c. Instructional hours for public education is ~1000 hours per year. $9/h student.
4a. For young ages (K-5), education oriented daycare centers are $100-$200 a week, 6:30-18:30. 60 hours per week.
4b. For 25 children: $50,000-$100,000 revenue to the day care business.
4c. For 40 weeks, 2400 hours. $4000-$8000 per student. $0.6-$1.2/h student.
At least $125,000 missing per class.
Just like in Robert's example, politicians, unions, government officials of all levels, and "educrats" are stealing money from the students and teachers.
Switching to bottoms up funding where the students and parents pay teachers directly prevents bureaucrats from stealing ~50%+ of the education budget from teachers ($6 billion for Arizona!), and puts the money into the hands of the educators chosen by the students and parents.
Petar Ivanov
So if the public school shrinks by say 30%.... I'd like to focus on the students. Isn't it great that they discovered an education pathway better for them? That they are liberated from the shackles of textbooks and curriculum planning by politicians? That they can choose when, why, what, how, where they learn, and who teaches them?
Why are federal and state government mandating curriculum anyways? 12 years of life dictated by the government in an education system without much liberty?
The funny guys and class clowns may actually like Shakespeare's comedies. They are forced Hamlet, Othello, and Macbeth. The teachers know their individual students better than the politicians. Shakespeare has many books, yet teachers are so locked up by politicians calling the shots, they have to force the textbook. It's a disgrace.
I know tenured teachers or administrators may feel threatened by having to attract and compete for students and parents who hold the voucher money... but seriously, man up and compete like every other service does for customers. If you are a great educator, attracting students on $8000 vouchers should be no problem, in inner cities where populations are large and close together, 40 students from the same apartment block lands you $320,000 in revenue for 1000 hours of teaching plus anything parents add on top.
So if the public school shrinks by say 30%, and they will have to tighten their belt. The same thing happens with tutors and restaurants, if you do a bad job, the students and customers go elsewhere. This is where concerns for athletic programs getting cut come in?
Petar Ivanov
-Football crazy parents can send their football crazy children to education services for the football crazy where they all fit in.
-Baseball players who see more funding go to the school football programs could simply start baseball centered education services.
-non-athletes who see no benefits from athletic programs could choose schools that offer services focusing on arts, sciences, and engineering.
-special-ed schools can specialize in special ed and finally have the money to employ specialists, specialist impeded by the low pay offered by public schools will finally have a market to earn a decent wage if they are good.
Division of labor and specialization are two key components of civilization, technological advancements, and efficiency improvements... both components are absent in America's public education because of the federal, state, and local government rules and regulations. Vouchers opening up the market allow for division of labor and specialization in education services.
Petar Ivanov
""
"how do you envision competition in rural areas where there's only demand for one school in a wide radius"? Well, it's a buyers market.
Most of the rural towns I have been through in the Midwest want nothing more than the government to simply get off their lawn, and stay off. Education "vouchers" break the chains of government rule, regulation, management and operation.
So let's say this rural community has 20 K-12 students, $8000/student.
And the parents pool their money together
And the parents choose me to decide the education for their kids
And the parents choose me to be King of education.
So I have $160,000 of government money to spend on the education of 20 kids for an entire year -- plus anything the parents or community members decide to donate.
I would put up advertisements across Mexico:
"Paying $80,000 cash to the Mexican Mariachi band that teaches singing, dancing, music, songwriting to a small rural American town for 10 hours a day, 6 days a week, for 40 weeks."
Use the remaining $80,000 to buy instruments, decorations, and whatever other supplies. And for one year they are learning Spanish, music, song writing, dancing, and interacting with musicians from Mexico.
So...
How do you envision the education change for the children of an inner city single mother of 5 who now has $40,000 a year for buying education products and services --- where before she had $0 and a worthless inner city public school assigned by zip code?
""
Petar Ivanov
Advertisements across former Soviet countries
-"Paying up to $100,000 in cash to the group of 3 circus performers that teach circus tricks, maths, and Russian to a small rural American town for 10 hours a day, 6 days a week, for 40 weeks."
-"Free room + food + experience of living in an American rural town. OBO/Negotiable"
Then I would use the other $60,000 to buy resources for all the students.
One year of Russian, circus performing, physical fitness, health, exercise, and math.
One year of Spanish, Mariachi bands, music, dance, song writing"
""
Allan, I think if you asked your students:
"what is the most outrageous craziest education plan you can think of for a class of 20 students for one year using $160,000" they would have many more great ideas than the ones I posted.
The combined creativity and education talents of 300 million American market participants is much greater than that of the central planning politicians and the Department of Education.
My favorite one so far with an open education market is from Greg Swanson: home schooling + a $50/month gym membership.
Alan Russell
By the way, where I live and teach, people would beat you to death if you suggested taking away their football program, even if it has never won a game. I still think it's worth talking about, though.
Greg Swanson
Now i'm going to exaggerate for simplicity sake, but hear me out. What if I get a gym membership for my kid which would cost $50/month, but since I want to make sure he shows up and at least is present, I pay for an additional attendance service of $10/month. I want my kid to emphasize math and since I am a math whiz, I take on the task of teaching my kid math in the evenings. For geography, social studies, chemistry, biology, etc; I sign my kid up to take proctored tests that might cost $100/month and I give him internet access (he's going to be better doing the research anyways) and he'll find the lessons himself. Since I believe that he should have a good quality social life, I help organize LAN parties for him and friends, talk with other parents and have our kids develop extracurricular activites. As far as text books go, most subjects that are below the graduate school level, have good and FREE pdfs available online since the basics of the sciences don't change, and the social sciences and arts are very much free online anyways. Finally, for those parents that feel their children are going to surpass them in education, there will be a default curriculum that outlines what is suggested for someone to be financially successful.
Again, this is extremely simplified, but I think a voucher system would work well as long as it was in dollars and/or there was a loosely defined way of allowing the kids and parents to have educational options.
source - http://californiawatch.org/k-12/majority-states-largest-districts-shrink-school-calendar-amid-budget-crisis
Petar Ivanov
Fantastic assessment using gym memberships as a pricing model. That takes care of the Physical Education class quite easily too. Many gyms have computer terminals. Group your child up with two or three friends, and the purchasing power gets them a daily personal trainer likely to be versed in the topics of health & fitness, first aid, and nutrition. "I'll drop my kid off at the gym on my way to work, $50/month" Brilliant.
Science at the gym is easy, it is a playground for Newtonian mechanics.
-Galileo's rolling balls down incline benches using dumbbells
-Pendulum experiments by suspending barbell weights from the squat cage
-Pulleys with the weight lifting machines
I agree the system needs to be cash into the hands of the parents and educational freedom, no strings.
Ellen Feig 500+
Petar Ivanov
Some of the voucher systems have been a mess, some have parents in inner cities celebrating winning vouchers (handed out by lottery) as if it the megamillions. Students and parents paying for education directly (with government helping with finance) would lead to flight from the bad teachers, and flight to the good ones. Bad teachers simply have to shut down because they have no income, and the good ones open up space for more students and get more money. I agree it is a sad thing to see schools close doors, but on a personal level for me, it is even worse to see children being cheated out of an education, to see good teachers being cheated out of fair pay, and to see bad teachers get a free ride. So let the bad schools and teachers fail, let the good ones thrive.
Bottoms up comes by putting money into the hands of the students and parents to have choice. It also gets the parents more involved and active in education now that they are responsible for choices rather than government.
In the 1700s, England had the same problem with tenure. Oxford stagnated, yet universities in Scotland (Glasgow, Edinburgh) thrived in part to students having choice and paying professors directly.
Arkady Grudzinsky 50+
If government stops taking responsibility for education and the economy starts suffering from the lack of skilled labor, wouldn't private corporations and citizens pick up the tab? Voluntarily? Not with the hidden agenda to fund religion (which wouldn't be an issue when no public money is involved), but with an open agenda of making more money? Does the financial burden need to be carried by the public at all?
A side benefit of this might be a less polarized, more responsible, and more charitable society that does not blame the government for its failures. Not to mention significantly smaller taxes and government budgets.
Don Anderson 20+
By simply allowing taxpayers without children to use the national-online education system, via something like X hours based on how much they helped pay for it.
Greg Swanson
Don Anderson 20+
I’m not saying online is better than classroom, nor would I say classroom is better than online.
Instead I saying 50% of both is better than 100% of one or the other.
And I’m talking about what online will/could be, currently its still in the Bata stage.
If you look at some TED talks about “online education” you can get an idea of where it is headed, and once it gets out of Bata it will no long be free. Envision a national system with literally thousands of teachers to choose from and in as many subjects as you can dream up.
Plus 50/50 would be an equalizer for students in poor preforming schools, in that a student’s online 50% would of equal value no matter what classroom school they went to.
Brock Hardwood
I'm not saying that it can't work, but I would want to see some real studies on it first, using a random group of students from all walks of life.
Brock Hardwood
Publicly funded education solves this problem.
Arkady Grudzinsky 50+
It might also exacerbate the problem of outsourcing of skilled labor, of course.
Brock Hardwood
If employers had to pay $200,000 to hire a new employee, nobody would hire new employees.
" not by childless people or elderly property owners"
Everybody benefits from a strong economy and an educated workforce.
Arkady Grudzinsky 50+
If $200,000 - perhaps not. But the cost of up to one grade might be reasonable. Often, companies pay relocation expenses in tens of thousands of dollars to hire a skilled employee from overseas.
Re: "Everybody benefits from a strong economy and an educated workforce."
This is a generalization. I have no idea who this "everybody" is. And this "everybody" seems to always have his own idea of what he benefits from.
Brock Hardwood
We are still left with the question of who is going to pay for the rest.
"This is a generalization"
It is a reasonable generalization. We are not writing stringent legal documents on this forum. Most people benefit from a strong economy. Is that better? lol
Arkady Grudzinsky 50+
The amount can be calculated based on how many times people change jobs over their life time, on average. It's not so difficult. IRS can come up with a number, so can ADP or BLS.
Brock Hardwood
Petar Ivanov
Theft of property by government through taxation is absolutely not fair, I agree.
The children and youth are the future of any country, so for money being taken from a childless parents and redistributed to parents who are educating the next generation of citizens --- I side with the students. With vouchers providing a free education market, at least childless taxpayers could try to get some their stolen money back by offering education services to the students receiving their tax money.
For social justice, A and B:
A.
If government is going to steal and redistribute, I would rather see the stolen property of taxpayers given to the poor, middle class, and parents than given to the political elite, bureaucrats, and politicians
The current system is top-down Stalinist redistribution of your property to government bureaucrats and political elite who make the the education decisions and allocations how they see fit. The poor and middle class are forcibly assigned schools by their zip code.
Vouchers is bottom-up grassroots redistribution of your property into the hands of all K-12 students and parents, most of whom are poor and middle where they make the education decisions and allocations with their children. And the market would be open, so they could choose the public school, private school, home school, tutors, apprenticeships, internships or anything else. The public schools would not close, they would just have to compete for students like everyone else.
I would rather have a robber stealing my money give it to middle class and poor K-12 students than to the political elite to make education decisions for the middle class and poor.
So with a voucher of $8000 you have complete education freedom for your three children, and $24,000 a year purchasing power. The low-income family of five would be receiving $40,000/yr for education. $24,000 of free education money for K-12.
Petar Ivanov
For removing government completely from the responsibility of education: financing, operating, management. Some people think vouchers are the best way to do that, (so for example, they go around telling all the religious Americans that vouchers assist in paying for fees at private religious schools --- which is true). And that's their overt goal ("hidden agenda" is nonsense).
Voucher money gets allocated at the local government level, this removes at least two layers of the government education bureaucracy. Federal education gives one choice, state education 50 choices, local education thousands of choices. Because vouchers is only financing, all levels of government (federal, state, county, district, city) are removed from operation and from management of schools.
Introducing vouchers at a start 1-2% of population, then progressing to 5-10%, then to 100%. The government financing creates ~$500 billion/yr market for education services for tutors, individuals, entrepreneurs, businesses and charities to innovative and compete in the education service industry. The public schools would set their price at the level of the voucher, and would have to compete. This allows the free market to compete on an even playing field with public schools and build up education infrastructure.
If there is a shift towards not-government education (K-12 students and parents choosing tutors, online services, home schooling, not-public schools) then the local voters can decide to go the route of a transition to free market education reducing vouchers to zero. This attracts the free market people to the town.
If they decide to raise voucher money higher, this attracts people that like education welfare to their town. If they all choose to continue going to their public school, then the only thing changing about the public school is that parents and students are paying for the service, and the money is not coming top down from politicians.
Arkady Grudzinsky 50+
Arkady Grudzinsky 50+
Brock Hardwood
http://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/06/22/private-school-tuition-hits-the-stratosphere-40-000-per-year/
Arkady Grudzinsky 50+
Brock Hardwood
Imagine owning a business yourself...Would you want to invest $200,000 on just one employee, 12 years away from ever seeing a return on the investment, knowing up front that the child, when they become an adult, has no legal obligation to work for you or honor his parents agreement with you, also knowing that your competitors can better afford to offer better benefits to that potential employee because they never had to spend the $200,000 in the first place? Of course you wouldn't.
Education must be funded publicly or it will never happen.
" Is there a fundamental reason why public school system is more cost effective than private schools?"
Most likely, because there is no profit motive for public education. Also, education is already pretty efficient to begin with. There isn't a whole lot of room for improvement... In it's most basic form, it consists of a teacher, a room, chalkboard, textbooks, and desks. We can always increase the student to teacher ratio, but that is about it, and there are obvious limitations and consequences for doing that.
"Can it be the volume?"
Education costs scale pretty easily. If you have 30 students, you only need one room and one teacher and 30 text books. If you have 60, you only need two rooms and two teachers and 60 textbooks.. The costs track pretty closely to the number of students.
Also, even public schools suffer from low volume. There are plenty of small towns through out the United States with low student population. They still manage to provide a better education for half the price.
Arkady Grudzinsky 50+
I doubt this, if I may. Wherever there is a public need, there is a service provider to fill it in. With a right business model, it can be done. Of course, businesses will not invest in elementary school education of an individual student. There is no way to ensure that this student will work for a particular company or, even, in a particular field after graduating the high school, or even that he/she will live in this country or live at all. But it does not mean that businesses won't invest in K-12 education in general. When there is a shortage of young people with high-school education, market will come up with a solution. Filling needs is what market does best. Controlling and manipulating people is what government does best.
You may be right that human development cannot be optimized like production of electronic chips by installing a machine of some sort. However, I don't believe that it's impossible to provide private education at lower cost and better quality than the one funded by government. Cost scales down pretty dramatically when you buy furniture, supplies, and equipment by the million. I don't think, we need to argue about it. The only cost component that, perhaps, does not decrease with volume, is salaries.
I think, the fundamental reason why private education cannot compete with government is because government won't let go of the monopoly. It's about mind control and ideology, not about preparing children for life and labor force for economy. It is not a surprise that the only other institution who is willing to compete with the government is religion.
Brock Hardwood
Only if it is profitable. That is economics 101.
Private education costs, on average $20K per year. Only the wealthy would be able to afford it. If you are going to claim that someone will provide it, you need to demonstrate a mechanism that will guarantee it will happen. No rational understanding of free markets even remotely hints at investments with out any hope of return.
"Cost scales down pretty dramatically when you buy furniture, supplies, and equipment by the million"
You would be surprised at how little needs to be purchased to get the best price. Even a hundred desks are going to command a good bargain.
"I think, the fundamental reason why private education cannot compete with government is because government won't let go of the monopoly. "
There is no conspiracy and there is no monopoly. YOU could start a private school tomorrow, just like the other 5,000 private schools currently in the market.
Petar Ivanov
"I think, the fundamental reason why private education cannot compete with government is because government won't let go of the monopoly. "
Bingo!
Arkady Grudzinsky 50+
Currently, private schools are considered a luxury. If private schools become a commodity, I'm sure, the cost and price may drop significantly. Quality too, but there will be choice and healthy competition.
Brock Hardwood
True, but the tuition is still what it is, and there is no rational reason to believe it would change.
On any demand curve (law of demand), there are exactly two price points that maximize profits. These points are where prices tend to gravitate to in a free market economy.
" If private schools become a commodity, I'm sure, the cost and price may drop significantly"
You're guessing.
Petar Ivanov
Chile's voucher programs and open education markets provide an excellent example of how competition drives down price and drives up innovation. Price wars to attract buyers of products and services are seen across all industries and business, including private educational services like SAT tutoring.
I think the troll count for Brock is at three users now? Moderators still sleeping at the switch?
Petar Ivanov
USPS is an unprofitable, inferior service that costs the country billions of dollars in losses every year. DHL, FedEx, UPS, and any other competitor has to figure out how to make profits to be sustainable. And at the same time, the USPS monopoly prevents better services like FedEx from having a larger market to serve where they can further innovate and reduce costs through competition. So Americans are getting DMV and USPS educations because the state has a monopoly on education.
I used government controlled food production and food services in East Germany as an analogy, your USPS analogy is a much better one.
Companies owners would do things to capture the $8000/head student bounty: internships and apprenticeships for math, computer programming, physics, sciences, all while helping out solving real world problems related to the business. Companies that already have daycare centers would now have the market to expand education service offers to the children of employees.
The weekly daycare rates from 6:30-18:30 are $100-$200/week on the market. Microsoft and Google give employees 20% discounts on child-care arrangements already, so they could get $8000 per employee child offering Google child care.
Brock Hardwood
We already KNOW that public schools are more cost effective that private schools. $9K < $20K. We don't have to guess what private industry COULD do, There are already more than 5,000 private schools in the market already, and they have been there for a while. They have already proven that they can't do it cheaper.
Petar Ivanov
If public schools are 50% cheaper than private schools, then the voucher system will see parents and students choosing public schools, and the public schools expanding and putting private schools out of business.
Not only that, the money going to the teachers of the public schools will increase significantly because the funding is from bottoms up through the parents and students directly to the teachers. This makes the politicians at the federal, state, county, and city levels obsolete, and makes the unions obsolete too. More money into the hands of the teachers.
Consider the statistics Robert Winner just posted for his home state of Arizona:
https://www.ted.com/conversations/15730/why_does_us_education_cost_so.html
1a. 1,077,831 K-12 students
1b. $7,931 per student
1c. $8,554,744,647
2a. 51,947 teachers
2b. $$44,642 per teacher salary
2c. $2,319,017,974
$6.2 billion dollars missing.
Under vouchers, all $8,554,744,647 would be going directly to the public school teachers, given to them by the students and parents. That's $6.2 billion dollars more to the teachers for resources for sciences, maths and engineering you like. So if anything, you should be an ardent supporter of vouchers.
Arkady Grudzinsky 50+
This would be true if the government favored a particular religious doctrine. But it's hard to make this argument if people are granted complete freedom in choosing what school they want to attend. In this case, school vouchers seem to strengthen the 1st amendment rights if they have anything to do with it at all.
Education, by definition, means putting ideas in people's heads. Can we trust the government such a delicate business? If we support freedom of ideas and freedom to believe what we choose, if we oppose indoctrination, shouldn't we separate school and state just as we *claim* we separate state and religion (which is a tough claim to make after watching the inauguration oaths)? It seems to me that 1st amendment rights are much better off with government out of education business.
If we support the 1st amendment rights, why would we be outraged with people who want to exercise them by choosing religious education for their children?
Lest I am accused of having a hidden agenda, I need to disclose that I have received a free higher education in a Soviet state university and have 3 children going to public American schools. I confess my own hypocrisy on this issue. I support public education, but I support freedom of choice too. It does seem to me that schools vouchers would be a good compromise.
Brock Hardwood
Two problems... First, 85% of all private schools are religious in nature. The issue at stake here is the establishment clause, not the free exercise clause. The systemic consequence of vouchers is the funding of religion. It can be broken down ever further by realizing the some religions more represented than others. As for the free exercise clause, nothing is stopping people from choosing to spend their own money on a religious education..
While the 1st amendment issue is important to me, it is not my most significant issue...
Second, and far worse is to realize that private schools are not held to any curriculum standards.
Public education is provided for a reason - our economy needs an educated work force and future innovators to thrive. This is what tax payers are paying for. We expect a curriculum that includes the teaching of science to prepare students for the demands of a 21st century economy. A curriculum that trades away science for religion means that the tax payer isn't getting value for their dollar.
Arkady Grudzinsky 50+
Your second concern can be easily addressed by licensing, much like state regulates the medical, construction, or food industry. Or, better yet, if private schools are funded by businesses who hire the graduates, it can be easily addressed by free market if school funding is set up to be proportional to the quality of education they provide.
Brock Hardwood
Wishful thinking. Once the government collects taxes, that money belongs to the government. The government is prohibited from funding religion.
"Or, better yet, if private schools are funded by businesses who hire the graduates,"
What if the students decide not to work for that company? That investment is lost forever. Competitors who are not burdened by the expense of providing the education can better afford to offer better benefits to the employees. This is why education must be publicly funded. It simply wouldn't happen otherwise.
Petar Ivanov
Brock's reasoning compels him to forcibly prevent people on food stamps from buying Halal and Kosher food.
It also compels him to prevent public officials from using their salary to send their own child to religious schools.
Government is not "respecting *an* establishment of religion"
Government is not funding religion.
With vouchers, the government is funding parents and students and giving them educational liberty: giving life, liberty and freedom of educational choice to the people.
Petar Ivanov
And adding more: Brock, Who do you mean when you say "We" and "taxpayers"? Surely you mean "I". Gallup polls show that over 80% of Americans believe in God, and over 40% have views consistent with intelligent design. They would disagree with your "we" comments, and their calculus on "value for their dollar" for religious education will be much different than yours. America is predicated on life, liberty, and religious freedom among others, and vouchers+educational freedom are more consistent with the first amendment than the current public education system anyways.
A voucher distribution done by local government would be for the people of the town to vote on standards and strings attached to vouchers. Atheist voters, atheist requirements. Muslim voters, Muslim requirements. Christian voters, Christian requirements.
Science education is handicapped in public schools because the rules, regulations, and liabilities. And as Arkady suggested with businesses funding private schools, science companies like Johnson&Johnson have better resources, talent, and hands on opportunity for science instruction than public schools will ever have. Johnson&Johnson could also do this under a voucher system too as they would have a market supported by government financing.
And finally, vouchers are not private schools vs public schools as all students can choose to select the public school. Vouchers are giving cash to parents and students and letting them be free to choose their education. They can choose tutors, home schooling, daycare, apprenticeships, internships, or any other education service offer out there. They can choose to pay the existing public schools, as their price would be the same as the voucher.
Brock Hardwood
We are a very religious country, not because government supports religion, but because it keeps its nose out of it. If the government favored one religious view over another, it would necessarily suppress all other views. As we have seen all around the world, when government gets into the business of religion, chaos ensues, and violence erupts.
It is more than just believing in god or not believing in god. It can be Catholicism vs Protestant, Islam vs Christianity, Mormon vs whatever, etc. When the government stays out of religion, personal freedoms of belief flourish.
"America is predicated on life, liberty, and religious freedom among others,"
True, and If the U.S. gets into the business of religion, liberty and religious freedom will be the first things we'll loose.
Brock Hardwood
There was a time when most of the population believed the earth was flat. That doesn't justify an education that teaches that the earth is flat.
Intelligent design is creationism with no supporting physical evidence. The Dover trials made that perfectly clear. It is a topic of faith and nothing more. Nothing is stopping you from using your own private money to support your own religious choices.
Arkady Grudzinsky 50+
In these days of global economy, I see the need for international education standards. IB diplomas become more popular. The easiest way to achieve this is, perhaps, through an international organization of some sort transcending governments. Most other international industry standards are maintained this way, with no or little government regulation. I think, this is where education will go in the future.
Brock Hardwood
It is the lack of curriculum standards that leads my list of objections towards vouchers. I would be fine with vouchers as long as the recipient schools were required to teach a standardized curriculum as determined by the Department of Education. I am perfectly fine with religious private schools adding to that curriculum, to include religious studies, but not subtracting from it.
Vouchers would also need to be limited to the amount that would have otherwise gone to public schools.
Arkady Grudzinsky 50+
What you say is true and correct. But I still question the premise that school vouchers equate to government funding religion or favoring a particular religion by giving money to people for education and letting them choose how to spend it.
Brock Hardwood
Giving people money "for education" requires the government to define what constitutes education. Otherwise, it could be used for buying a car.
I am not apposed to parents choosing a religious education on top of the standard curriculum expected and payed for by the government, as long as the vouchers do not exceed the cost of a public education.
Arkady Grudzinsky 50+
Brock, you seem to have an unjustified bias towards the quality of education in religious schools. In the city I live, I know 3 "religious" high schools - all highly desirable for many parents - religious and non-religious alike.
Let's not forget that Newton was a believer, big bang theory was introduced by Georges Lemaitre, a catholic priest, and genetics was founded by Gregor Mendel, a monk.
Brock Hardwood
"Let's not forget that Newton was a believer, big bang theory was introduced by Georges Lemaitre, a catholic priest, and genetics was founded by Gregor Mendel, a monk."
True, and they would all agree that those subjects should be apart of a standardized curriculum. Newton, as well as Galileo, would obviously support the teaching of the scientific method and advanced mathematics. Even more, the Catholic church, along with many other denominations of Christianity, are perfectly fine with the teaching of Evolutionary theory (the grand unifying theory of biology and medicine).
Brock Hardwood
I am not outraged at all. People are more than welcome to do this, as long as they do it with there own private funds. They are free to go to what ever church they like, and believe whatever they want to believe.
However, with public funds we expect students to learn science, mathematics, reading, writing, social studies, history, geography, etc....In short, we expect an education that will produce a productive member of society. We expect an education that prepares students for a 21st century economy. We expect an education that will produce the next generation of doctors, nurses, engineers, architects, software developers, bio-chemists, etc...
Arkady Grudzinsky 50+
You keep repeating this over and over. Other than your fear that people will spend the vouchers on religious education (which is their 1st amendment right), I don't see why you are opposed to school vouchers. This does seem like your primary concern.
Re: "However, with public funds we expect students to learn science, mathematics, reading, writing, social studies, history, geography, etc....In short, we expect an education that will produce a productive member of society."
Who's "we"? This is funny. "We the people" expect "them the people" to do this and that to ensure their own freedom and happiness. And if they choose not to do that, "we" will force them.
Brock Hardwood
Consider the question of why you think our education is failing. What standard are you measuring that to? Notice that once you ask that question of yourself, you are immediately forced to deal with the fact that you have a standard for education that must be objective.
So what is that standard?
Pay close attention to this point: If you don't have an expectation for what education is, you can not claim it is either succeeding or failing, or that one system is better or worse than the other at providing it.
Arkady Grudzinsky 50+
Against same-sex marriage? Don't have one!
Against abortion? Don't have one!
Against religious education? Don't give your children to a religious school! Give your child and your voucher to a public school.
But don't tell other people who to marry and what to teach their children. Especially if you care for human rights. This is my hidden conservative religious agenda.
Brock Hardwood
As long as that school teaches what the government expects them to teach (math, science, reading, writing, history, etc) they are more than welcome to teach bible studies, underwater basket weaving, etc.
I am not apposed to parents choosing a religious education on top of the standard curriculum expected and payed for by the government, as long as the vouchers do not exceed the cost of a public education.
Arkady Grudzinsky 50+
Brock Hardwood
Arkady Grudzinsky 50+
Anyway, thanks for a great discussion! :-)
Petar Ivanov
*www.usagovernmentspending.com shows American local governments spending $458.3 billion for K-12 education in 2012.
*(Sir Ken Robinson says this education system is a complete failure)
*The new education cost of $8000 education check to 50 million K-12 students is $400 billion per year
*This saves $58.3 billion
*(a $6000 check would save $158.3 billion)
*The yearly education check allows students(and their parents) to choose how, when, where, and what they learn, and also who teaches them
*The yearly education check of $8000 opens up a $400B/year market to entrepreneurs, teachers, and creatives
*($6000 check opens up a $300B/year market to entrepreneurs, teachers, and creatives)
State fiscal crisis solved, federal fiscal crisis solved, and the new education market leads America's economic recovery.
Thoughts everyone?
Brock Hardwood
For conservatives, public educations is cost effective (costing less than half the price of a similar private education), it provides a transparent curriculum standard (something that private schools do not have to do), it is beneficial to business and industry, and with the teaching of math and science, it delivers the next generation of innovators necessary for our continued economic growth.
For liberals, public education is cost effective, provides choices, prepares children to find a good job, and provides an opportunity to be more successful than their parents.
Mike Colera 10+
The case for public education is a lower cost then vouchers seems a wash. If $9K is given to public schools or given to a voucher program and let the parents purchase an education from a market is still $9K. If parents are given a lessor amount would those funds be used to address our fiscal problems? There seems to be no government agenda to address the fiscal problems as they seem to be bent on creating more fiscal crisis, but that's another conversation.
It seems the question has be come: can parents purchase a equal education for that voucher?
There is one point of view that public schools can provide the best education for $9K per child and a commercial education paid by voucher can not come close, it would cost 5X that amount and not be of any greater quality.
That's a too absolute statement and not even absolute zero is that absolute according to a quantum physicist I know.
Further, if we hire more skilled teachers and increase emphasis on.... STEM.... would not that action; new hires, new education materials, etc. add to the current cost of $9K? Further, would all our newly educated STEM graduates address the needs in our country for a skilled population? According to a major Home Builder on a local TV interview: "Carpenters, Plumbers, Interior Electrician skills are being filled by illegal immigrants" Is the national illegal immigration problem being exacerbated by our students are being schooled in the passing of state tests so every child can go to college?
So many questions, so few righteous answers.
John Moonstroller 30+
If we focus on this for a moment and understand that most industries are becoming extremely modularized in their applications, even the building industry. They can hire less educated people because all they have to do is follow the same format over and over again to achieve the necessary results. Building a home for a general population is easier than building one that requires some off the norm designs.
Most of the investigations in our local area, (Georgia) reveal that immigrants do work for less, so this industry like most others is money driven towards the final product. All of this modularization is supported by computers which helps to generate these designs throughout industries. Eventualy, almost any industry can become so modularize that robotics can be implemented, and workers can be removed from the equation all together.
I'm seeing this in the online education coursed being offered. A teacher makes the necessary video and they are no longer needed after that, except to answer student question via email. I think education will follow this norm because those students that learn on their own (the upper classes) are more successful in school. It's not necessarily a result of the quality of the teacher. Teacher dependent students tend to perform at a lower level in general education, and succeed less, compared to the more successful students.
A voucher program that can be taken advantage of by some families might offer a means for a student, caught in the general education system an opportunity to move to a higher playing field.
Brock Hardwood
It still doesn't change the fact that private schools cost twice as much as public schools for a similar education.
John Moonstroller 30+
What school do you attend? You are a student correct? An old one or a young one?
Brock Hardwood
From a government expense point of view, that would be true, but it still doesn't address the question of value for each dollar. Public education is provided for a reason - our economy needs an educated work force and future innovators to thrive. Private industry can not afford to educate it's workers from the ground up. The investment would be far too risky as any competitor could then just simply steal the employee away from them. Publicly funded education solves this problem, but only if it provides a curriculum that is useful to industry.
Curriculum is key. Voucher proponents already know that public education is more cost effective. It is the curriculum that they don't like. You have seen it through out this conversation, time and time again when I bring up curriculum standards, the proponents dodge it like the plague. They know that 85% of all private schools are religious in nature, and THAT is their real motivation - to fund religion with tax payer dollars.
For them, a perfectly legitimate graduation standard would consist of the student being a Christian and nothing else. It protects the church from dwindling attendance, but it doesn't prepare students for our 21st century economy.
If parents want their children to receive that kind of education, they are more than welcome to fund it themselves.
Brock Hardwood
The short answer: Most likely, however we already teach STEM to some degree already, so it may not be significantly more.
It becomes a simple question of 'what do we expect our education system to deliver?' and how much are we willing to pay for it. Do we want to be competitive with the rest of the world? This is a question that every tax payer needs to ask themselves. One thing is clear though, public schools already have some emphasis in this area already, and they are far more cost effective compared to private schools at delivering a quality education.
My argument in favor of a rigorous STEM education centers around the economy's perspective. That is, if only 1 out of 1,000 students exposed to that rigorous standard went on to be innovators, it would be an outstanding return for our money. That would mean that our 50 million children currently attending K-12 would translate into 50,000 innovators for our future. The rest would, at a minimum, be ready to be worthwhile contributors to our technologically advanced economy.
prakhar porwal
prakhar porwal
surest route to the middle class. To compete with
other countries we must strengthen STEM
education. Early in my administration, I called for
a national effort to move American students from
the middle to the top of the pack in science and math achievement. Last year, I announced an
ambitious goal of preparing 100,000 additional
STEM teachers over the next decade, with growing
philanthropic and private sector support. My
"Educate to Innovate" campaign is bringing
together leading businesses, foundations, non- profits, and professional societies to improve
STEM teaching and learning. Recently, I outlined a
plan to launch a new national STEM Master
Teacher Corps that will be established in 100 sites
across the country and be expanded over the next
four years to support 10,000 of the best STEM teachers in the nation.
Brock Hardwood
John Moonstroller 30+
When I graduated in the Eighties, the jobs were not there. We were in the midst of a recession and everyone was either slowing down or cutting back. I ended up creating a job in the metal salvage industry; made boo-cu bucks. I also established a lock and key business before settling in the programming industry as a lone maverick. My first job was as a programmer in a robotics factory but that fell off after a year, leaving me looking for work. There simply weren't any jobs to be had back then and entrepreneurship was the way to go, as it might be today.
Brock Hardwood
Our weak economy doesn't help. Degrees without experience have always posed difficulty for new grads throughout all of history.
It can be hard for some to realize the value of a science education. Not everybody is going to go into a profession that needs it. To that end, I actually think one of the most practical classes I ever took in high school was typing. However, from an economy point of view, if only 1 out of 1,000 students with a science education went on to be innovators, the payoff would be worth it. 50 million K-12 students in the pipeline would translate to 50,000 innovators for our future.
John Moonstroller 30+
http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2012-07-07/national/35486154_1_research-jobs-life-sciences-scientists
Petar Ivanov
A. Turning the food service industry over to the government where politicians tell you when, what, where, and how to eat.
A'. Turning the education industry over to the government where politicians tell students when, what, where, and how to learn.
B. A completely open food service industry where anyone can open a restaurant, grocery store, deli, bakery, and people are free to chose when, what, where, and how they eat.
B'. A completely open education service industry where anyone can offer education services, and people are free to chose when, what, where, and how they learn --- and the government redistributes wealth into the hands of K-12 students every year in the form of a $8000/student/yr.
Equality is in the $8000 voucher to every K-12 student, and everyone is free to choose non-profit education services like TED.
Brock Hardwood
If we are going to spend public funds, the tax payer still has a right to know that the education being provided is going to prepare students for the 21st century economy. That means private schools must be willing to provide a standardized curriculum that teaches science, mathematics, and so on...
The tragedy of vouchers is that they don't save you (you have to pay the remaining tuition that the voucher doesn't cover), or the tax payer money. Private schools on average, cost twice as much to provide an equivalent education as public schools. The really good private schools can cost 40K per year. FACT!
http://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/06/22/private-school-tuition-hits-the-stratosphere-40-000-per-year/
Mike Colera 10+
Your conviction of the ineffectiveness of vouchers is as great as Petar's belief of their effectiveness. My knowledge of this matter is mostly based on watching a large number of families participating in a lottery for school vouchers. The joy of the winners and the despair of the losers leads me to believe that parents hold these vouchers in high regard. The losers stated they wanted these vouchers for the betterment of education for their children. The cost of a commercial education vs. public could be lower based on market competitiveness, but if we look at higher education, it would seem that quality is tied to cost. Although I am hard pressed to measure the quality of education of a BA from downtown college and Harvard compared to the 1000% cost differential. Further, I question if any monies would be gained from voucher programs to be used to address the fiscal crisis. There is too much pork out there for government to buy.
I am more concerned that our public education system has demanded more and more funds to provide our children an education. When questioned, the response is if they are not funded our children would be harmed. We don't want our children harmed in their education, so we've paid. But over the last 50 years, the measured level of our children's education has fallen precipitously. Our country is being dumbed down. There are a thousand examples of this.. for another conversation.
If the nation gets much "dumber", it won't be long before there will only be a few highly knowledgeable academia who could help us govern our nation. I know it sounds far fetched, until I read a paper by a highly respected professor of political science who asked... why do we need the Constitution? But, don't take my word for it, go ask a young person.
(I have already done this). American History? Government? Mandarin Chinese? They know more Chinese. OK, I've exaggerated, but not by much!
Brock Hardwood
"The cost of a commercial education vs. public could be lower based on market competitiveness"
Competition doesn't really lower prices, innovation does. A for-profit organization's primary concern is the bottom line. On any given demand curve, there are precisely two points that maximize profit. Those two points are where price tend to gravitate towards regardless of competition. This is where public schools have a true advantage. They have no need to incorporate profit into the cost.
That leave us with the question of innovation or efficiency. How much more efficient can we get? Consider a math class: A room, a chalkboard, a teacher, and 30 desks. There just isn't much room for improvement aside from increasing class size. Any innovations beyond that can be implemented in BOTH public and private schools. Your Harvard example is great in that it we really are left with the question of why they charge so much more given that they teach the same thing, under the same basic conditions.
We can also show that a larger customer base isn't necessarily going to decrease the cost of private schools either. There are plenty of private schools that have student populations nearing 1000, yet they still charge $15,000 - $20,000 in tuition. In some parts of the country, public schools also have low population counts (100-200 students), yet the average cost overall is still only $9,166.
"I am more concerned that our public education system has demanded more and more funds to provide our children an education."
We know exactly how much our public education system costs, and it is significantly less than private schools with similar results.
Mike Colera 10+
My concern has been that the $9K we are paying for public education is way too much for the value received.
Brock Hardwood
That maybe true, but that is a different topic altogether. I have a TED conversation that talks about textbooks that you might want to look at. (as one idea for saving money on education)
http://www.ted.com/conversations/15807/department_of_education_hires.html
Petar Ivanov
1. Competition lowers prices because it takes away a monopolist's rent. Most everyone (except for you?) knows this.
2. What do competitors do to out compete their opponents? They innovate. Most everyone (except for you?) knows this.
3. Innovation or efficiency is a false question because your premises are false (see 1,2). And the question is false dichotomy anyways because there are innovations in efficiency.
4. "larger customer base isn't necessarily going to decrease the cost of private schools either." That's false, this is called economies of scale. And you actually used an economies of scale argument for public schooling early in the conversation.
5. The average cost for K-5 education is around $5000-$6000 a year at private schools. $9000 minimum at public schools. Day cares are $100-200 a week from 6:30am to 6:30pm, putting 36 weeks of day care at $3600-$7200.Your $15,000 tuition fee is patently false for K-5. Thousands of private high schools cost less than $8000/yr to attend.
6. The $9k being too much is EXACTLY the topic of this conversation and thread, and it would be great if you could go take your lies and false information over to your own conversation.
7. Nationwide high school by grouping:
-21% of Asians fail to graduate
-24% of whites fail to graduate
-40% of blacks fail to graduate
-42% of Latinos fail to graduate
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/26/high-school-graduation-ra_n_2194378.html
8. "91 percent of the D.C. students who received the voucher scholarships graduated, according to lead researcher Patrick Wolf of the University of Arkansas. That's compared to a 70 percent graduation rate for the kids who hadn't won vouchers."
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2012-09-09/news/ct-edit-voucher-0909-bd-20120909_1_vouchers-paul-e-peterson-graduation-rates
Brock you are a liar with an agenda.
Moderators please remove Brock Hardwood from my conversation.
Brock Hardwood
you said:"1. Competition lowers prices because it takes away a monopolist's rent. Most everyone (except for you?) knows this."
I aced my college economics. Did you? There are already 5,000 private schools, and the average cost for them is still $20K per year, with the top performers costing $40K
http://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/06/22/private-school-tuition-hits-the-stratosphere-40-000-per-year/
"2. What do competitors do to out compete their opponents? They innovate. Most everyone (except for you?) knows this. "
And still, with all that competition between 5,000 private schools, they still haven't been able to innovate a tuition that costs less than public schools while still providing the same level of academic standards.
Point #3 relies on your misconceptions of points 1 & 2.
"this is called economies of scale..."
Economies of scale minimize the impact of fixed costs and costs associated with research - research being the most significant. With small schools, fixed costs are less because they can simply acquire a smaller building. In other words, fixed costs scale pretty smoothly with the size of the student body. Research in education theory is pretty much non existent. A teacher, a room, a chalkboard, textbooks, and students is the way it has been done for thousands of years, and it isn't going to change anytime soon.
"The average cost for K-5 education is around...."
Provide a source. Otherwise, you are lying.
"6. The $9k being too much is..."
Off topic. We are discussing vouchers as a solution (which they are not), not the cost in general.
Point 7: true, but still off topic.
"8. "91 percent of the D.C. students..."
True, but private schools can graduate a student by whatever standards they wish, and it doesn't have to be much. You are comparing apples to oranges.
"Moderators please remove..."
This speaks volumes about you...You KNOW you are wrong, so you prefer censorship.
Petar Ivanov
Brock Hardwood
A CONVERSATION involves more than one person...This is not your own private blog to fudge reality.
When it comes to respect, you have none. You prefer to make character attacks rather than debate the topic. Of course, we both know that your position is weak, and maybe that is why you are doing it.
I have no agenda other than to insure that the U.S. provides the most cost effective education while still maintaining curriculum standards. Public education costs a fraction of the price of private schools with similar results.
Petar Ivanov
Vouchers do not lead to more expensive private schools, Brock is lying through his teeth and he has an agenda.
My opinions on vouchers come through the 20+ years of empirical research and studies done on vouchers, and their outcomes compared to the current public education system. The conversation on this topic started out very well until Brock showed up and started spamming every posters with lies and misinformation. This conversation was very productive up until Jan 10, when Brock started sabotaging everything.
Brock Hardwood
Private schools cost, on average, twice as much as public education, they have selective admission policies (they can choose to only admit proven academic performers), and they have non transparent curriculum standards (they can graduate someone based on low standards if they choose - artificially inflating their graduation rates).
Ben Jarvis 50+
i don't benefit from a government monopoly at all and i do have to compete against other teachers, if i don't properly prepare my students for university and beyond, by school will have to answer to the education department and nobody will get raises. the point is that they will tell us to shape up, but they won't tell us *how* to shape up (and why should they, they are desk workers not teachers), which is important. we also are required to attend yearly conferences at both state and national level to ensure educational standards are kept as high as possible *at every school*.
education should be judged based on student success, not on popularity or appeal, and parents and students just aren't in a position to make that judgement, it would be like asking airline passengers to judge safety rather than the mechanics who actually look at the airplane parts and understand how they work. some private schools here get chosen because their school uniform is good-looking! i am honestly not making that up! do you think schools deserve to get additional funding because their uniform is cool?
Brock Hardwood
Petar Ivanov
The link you have already spammed about elite New York private schools is disingenuous, and does not provide any evidence towards your claim of "Private schools that cost $8,000(given that the known successful ones cost $40,000 per year) have yet to prove that they measure up... " So please do not spam that one again
Brock Hardwood
http://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/06/22/private-school-tuition-hits-the-stratosphere-40-000-per-year/
As for cheap private schools measuring up...It is YOU that needs to show that they provide an education that is comparable to a public education.
Petar Ivanov
I want to be clear that we are talking about Japan, and if the Japanese government gave the citizens individual liberty to choose their own education. We are not talking about America or the UK.
So in Japan, parents choose schools based on uniforms, just like how people judge books on their covers. Because the parents value nice uniforms, schools start trending towards nice uniforms to attract the parents. Is there methodology prioritizing education first? No, but that's the consequence of their decision. The educational results will be seen at the end of the year, and if the parents do not like the results, they can try another school that has good looking uniforms.
The same exact example of this is found in vegetable sections of supermarkets. The more aesthetically pleasing fruits and vegetables are bought despite the taste. If it tastes bad, the buyers will be cautious buying from that stack again. So test scores and educational improvements revealed at the end of the week, month, year are factors that parents would take into consideration when choosing to continue or discontinue the education service they are using.
Japan has a history, culture, and people from all other societies. Is a ruling elite herding Japanese sheep best for them? Maybe the Japanese elders all think that, and the youth thinks that once they are old and the system starts favoring them. You live in Japan, so you know more about the Japanese than I do. There will always be people who will be better off with a ruling elite making decisions for them. Maybe the Japanese fit into that category.
America is predicated on individual god-given rights: life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. And education vouchers are a big improvement in getting towards those three things compared to the current government controlled and mandated education system.
Brock Hardwood
Really? You think the Japanese are that absurd in their decision making process? That is simply ridiculous.
You watch too many movies.
Ben Jarvis 50+
Ben Jarvis 50+
Ben Jarvis 50+
(reply to your post below)
Ben Jarvis 50+
parents don't choose a school based on their uniform, but some students do. just think about your idea there - if the parents don't like the results at the end of the year they can choose another school - it's too late by that point, you're talking about a whole year of a child's development, and if they choose badly again next year too? you can't be enrolling all around the country all the time, that's why the best way is to make every school as good as it can possibly be, which means leaving it to the actual educators.
i think u refute yourself with your apple analogy, remember that the best medicine tastes bitter! if you're choosing on appearance and taste, are you getting the best nutrition? are you also avoiding tasteless undesirables? there's a reason we goto restaurants, it's because chefs are really good at choosing food and cooking it. if we used the same food and the same recipe at home, of course it won't taste as good as when it's done by an expert. the same can be said for choosing education.
from our discussion i'm getting the impression that your main objection is philosophical rather than rational - you don't like the idea that kids and parents not be in total control of the way they are educated - but that's actually a good thing. i'm not talking about japan or america or any place in particular, it's a usual, worldwide human thing to leave thing in the hands of professionals so you can have a better outcome. it's fine to put pilots in charge of flying the planes you ride, civil engineers in charge of designing the bridges you drive over, surgeons in charge of cutting you open, why not put teachers in charge of your education? of course they will take your own personal desires into account, and add to that their considerable expertise, which means that you get a much better education than you could have done if you were completely in charge.
Brock Hardwood
Naturally children make dumb choices, but my response wasn't about the kids choice, it was about the parents choice... My response started off with this quote from Petar:
"So in Japan, parents choose schools based on uniforms..."
note the word 'parents'
Ben Jarvis 50+
interested on how you think about having parents involved in decisions regarding educational policy. do you think they too are apt to make dumb choices?
Brock Hardwood
Regardless of where a child goes to school, be it public or private, parents encouraging and demanding academic effort is the single greatest success factor by far.
Another thing parents can do is take the time to understand what their children are learning in school. Rather than be upset that they are learning evolutionary theory, they should take the time to learn about it themselves from a scientific perspective. Naturally, I am not going to hold my breath while I wait for that to happen, but hope springs eternal....
Brock Hardwood
Should the private schools that receive tax payer dollars be subject to curriculum certification from the state?
The correct answers are all yes, but let's hear what you all have to say....
Don Anderson 20+
Brock Hardwood
The obvious answer is that you can't.
Don Anderson 20+
But if you need proof just Google "US school world ranking".
Brock Hardwood
And yet, that would obviously require a measurement standard.... I am fine with public schools not doing so well in comparison around the globe, but if we are going to pretend that private schools are the answer, then they must be held to the exact same standard, and must be able to live up to the same test.
Petar Ivanov
Nationwide high school by grouping:
-21% of Asians fail to graduate
-24% of whites fail to graduate
-40% of blacks fail to graduate
-42% of Latinos fail to graduate
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/26/high-school-graduation-ra_n_2194378.html
The politicians and Department of Education has failed.
Brock Hardwood
"Brock, here are statistics you have refused to acknowledge or read: "
Tragic numbers, naturally. However, to say that the Dept. of Education has failed, fails to acknowledge that it's mission to educate EVERYBODY means that there will be failures. Not every family is capable of supporting and fostering an environment of learning. Educated parents tend to lead to educated children. It has only been 3 generations since the civil rights movement and the desegregation of schools. Change of that nature takes time and can be slow going.
It is only a matter of time before we see those numbers improve.
But, to get back on topic...Public education still costs half the price of a similar private education. Vouchers are a bad idea.
Mike Colera 10+
1st question is: do taxpayers deserve a good ROI?
If yes and in the matter of education,
2nd question is: can we get a better a ROI from a voucher system?
So far, in most of the responses and doing the math, the cost side is a little weak in the accounting.
Now, most of the discussion has been on the quality of education in commercial vs. public education.
Understandably, but unless the dollars get worked out, we could be discussing living in a smart broke country or a dumb rich country. So any accountants to weigh in?
Petar Ivanov
For Pennsylvania, vouchers would reduce education fees by 50%!
The voucher programs running show that parents are more satisfied with school choice, schools that children choose are less segregated, it saves money, kids do better, improves public schools.
Government is especially failing in regard to inner city schools, minorities, and the poor. I don't have the drop out statistics link, nor the link for ~70% of minorities supporting vouchers. The lat real stronghold against vouchers comes from the rich and the elitist (whites) who want the poor and minorities to stay put in their zipcode.
Mike Colera 10+
I have heard that there could be economic benefits from voucher programs. Where I am unsettled is that to effect a reduction in fiscal pressures on the local, state and federal governments, some monies will not be expended on education and used (wasted) elsewhere.
Truism: Politicians like nature abhor a vacuum.
In a voucher system, there will be parents who will see to an outstanding education for their children. There will be "parents" who will not and may even appropriate the voucher funds.
In short order, there will be an outcry to save these children, committees will be formed, offices rented, administrators hired to fill the void left by the loss of public schools to get these children educated. These positions will be filled by the former public school administrators, who will soon enough find a way to expend all the monies saved by using vouchers.
I know I am a cynic.
PS,, Why is the Federal government in the K - 12 anyway????
Brock Hardwood
And private schools would STILL cost on average, 250% more than those vouchers... and 500% more for the really good private schools. Even in Pennsylvania, it is obvious that government can do it more efficiently, all while having transparent standards
http://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/06/22/private-school-tuition-hits-the-stratosphere-40-000-per-year/
Mike Colera 10+
Petar Ivanov
my guess is that once vouchers are passed, the K-12 parents will vote for higher amounts of redistribution of wealth through education funding, effectively taking money away from the politicians. For federal government, yeah they need to stay out
Brock, your spam has been refuted several times by multiple posters.
Here are the links again:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VTbMJtQL5ew
"Let me see if I can summarize: parents are more satisfied with school choice, schools that children choose are less segregated, it saves money, kids do better, improves public schools... why would anyone be against this?"
What don't you understand about economies of scales and competition?
That two week old account of yours sure qualifies you to judge the readership of TED conversations. Good one!
Brock Hardwood
Not by you, or anybody for that matter...Vouchers do not save money for the taxpayer. The average cost for private school is twice that of public school with zero measurable improvements in performance... (given that private schools are not required to meet any curriculum standards.)
Your problem, Petar, is that you think the ted readers are dumb. They are not.
Petar Ivanov
Students can choose to give their voucher to the public school they are already going to. They could even chose to use their vouchers to attend schools opened by the Department of Defense or by other arms of government.
What vouchers do is change how education is funded. Instead of giving politicians money and funding schooling top down through layers of bureaucracy, the funding comes grass roots from the bottom up by giving the money and choice to the parents and students.
Brock Hardwood
This is exactly why we, as tax payers, have a right to expect transparent standards and a curriculum that prepares students for a 21st century economy from private schools that receive tax dollars.
Petar Ivanov
Brock Hardwood
You are getting desperate. Private schools cost more than twice as much as public education, with no measurable difference in performance. Your entire ted conversation is an epic fail.
"You already dodged the question about freeing slaves being a good decision, which speaks volumes."
Freeing the slaves was a great thing...Now you can't use that BS argument anymore...You lose. The problem with you is that you actually think people are stupid. They are not. Most actually read my comments, and get that you are grasping at straws. You harm your own arguments and don't even realize it.
TED readers can read all of my posts. Not one of them ever talked about slaves. You have now PROVEN yourself to be a liar.
Petar Ivanov
So freeing the slaves was a great thing, yet Americans should be slaves to a government education system? And the poor and de-facto ethnic minority communities should be forced to go to schools within their own zip code? That's still racist, Brock.
What is it about individual liberty that you don't understand?
Brock Hardwood
You are more than welcome to spend your own money on a religious education. However, giving the poor a diploma that may as well be written on toilet paper doesn't help anybody. Private schools have no transparent curriculum standards. Sending kids to a school that will graduate kids for simply attending isn't a solution.
shawn disney 10+
Then there is the question of just what will "parents" (if any) do with their chunk of money. Suppose they spend it on cigarettes?! Remember , this is the next generation of voters you are talking about.l
Petar Ivanov
Vouchers are not about privatizing the schools! Vouchers are about parents and students funding the public schools by choosing to go to them.
Right now politicians spend $458.3 billion a year to decide when, what, where, and how your K-12 students learn. This East German education system of politicians calling the shots from high has failed.
Vouchers put that $458.3 billion into the hands of the K-12 students and parents. And the parents and students decide who, when, what, where, and how their children learn.
Vouchers change the financing mechanism of public education by making funding for education grassroots and bottoms up, coming from the people.
So what happens with vouchers is the public school sets a price equal to the vouchers, the K-12 students that are American citizens get their $8000 of cash for their yearly education, then the student can choose to give that money to the public school.
Brock Hardwood
Actually, 458.3 Billion is the cost of the entire education system that servers 50 million children, to include administrative costs. It is not the cost of decision making. If private schools provided the same amount of education, serving the same number of children, at the current average tuition charged by private schools of 20K, education would cost 1 Trillion dollars. (50 million children * $20,000 = $1 Trillion)
So much for the efficiency of private industry.
Petar Ivanov
You already dodged the question about freeing slaves being a good decision, which speaks volumes.
Brock Hardwood
TED readers can read all of my posts. Not one of them ever talked about slaves. You have now PROVEN yourself to be a liar.
Freeing the slaves was a great thing...Now you can't use that BS argument anymore...You lose. The problem with you is that you actually think people are stupid. They are not. Most actually read my comments, and get that you are grasping at straws. You harm your own arguments and don't even realize it.
Petar Ivanov
So freeing the slaves was a great thing, yet Americans should be slaves to a government education system? And the poor and de-facto ethnic minority communities should be forced to go to schools within their own zip code? That's still racist, Brock.
What is it about individual liberty that you don't understand?
Mike Colera 10+
I am lost on the problems with private prisons. I understand that there are successful private prisons all over.
Public Education has always been a local endeavor and until about 50 years ago, it was a pretty good system when compared to other schools systems around the world. Then the Federal Department of Education came on board to resolve the issues of segregated education. Once that problem was sort of resolved, they expanded into providing an equal education for all at a common level and provided funds to make that happen. Now, I am not privy to the full effects of standardized tests, dumbing down standards,
no child left behind, which I think means that a child can't fail his grade.
So now we have public schools collecting local school property tax, state education lottery receipts, as well as federal funds, All this money and what to do. Well, too many public school systems figured out that raising the learning curve was hard, but expanding the bureaucracy was easy, Now, the are school districts that have nearly 50% of their employees not teachers and they are still looking for more money.
So, will school vouchers improve children's education at a lower cost thus saving tax funds and by extension the fiscal crisis our government is in?
Can't hurt.
Brock Hardwood
Can't hurt."
Yes, as a matter of fact, it CAN HURT.
Private schools have not been shown to improve education.
Private schools, on average, cost more than twice as much per student ($20K vs $9K)
Private schools have no curriculum standards, meaning that the tax payers simply don't know what they are buying. Public schools are accountable to your elected school board.
Vouchers are a bad idea.
Mike Colera 10+
I am not sure you said what I understood.
There are public schools that do a great job as there are private schools that do the same.
But, the overall quality of our national education system is way down the list of industrialized nations and even some "Third World" counties according to UN observations.
25% of students who start K never pass 12, The next 25% who do are functional illiterates,
The next 25% can be functional adults, and 25% gain great knowledge, sometimes I think in spite of attending public schools. I don't blame teachers for this situation. As a large group of professionals, some are brilliant, most do a good job and a few should be out catching dogs and that is true of most large groups of professionals. I blame the ego centric bureaucracy of public education who are more concerned with it's own growth then the outcome of the students. The mantra of give us more money and we'll do a better job is getting old.
Further, how can you possibly think that parents who have accumulated wealth to afford 40 or 50K per year for their children's education and pay for a substandard result. These same people who will return a 500 Mercedes because the glove box is a 1/16 off. I am sure those kids are getting good schooling.
Elected school boards? Aren't they supposed to insure the public their children are getting a better education then nearly number 30 on the world list?
Vouchers? I am not sure they are as fiscally curative or educationally superior as Petar holds, but I am sure they can't be any worse then the status quo
Petar Ivanov
Brock must be paid to post here. After lying about his main concern being religion, now he is onto lying about costs and economics.
Summary of the testimony by Senator Piccola:
"Let me see if I can summarize: parents are more satisfied with school choice, schools that children choose are less segregated, it saves money, kids do better, improves public schools... why would anyone be against this?"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VTbMJtQL5ew
Brock Hardwood
they CAN be worse than the status quo for exactly the reasons you stated...They are not educationally superior, and they cost twice as much.
Petar Ivanov
Meta-analysis:
"out of 17 studies examining how vouchers affect academic achievement in public schools, 16 showed improvement. None showed that vouchers harm public schools. The review found that "every empirical study ever conducted in Milwaukee, Florida, Ohio, Texas, Maine and Vermont finds that voucher programs in those places improved public school."
Washington DC longitudinal study:
"In Washington, D.C., the young Opportunity Scholarship Program "significantly improved students' chances of graduating from high school," according to the Department of Education's Institute of Education Sciences. Both parents and students reported higher satisfaction and rated schools safer if the student was offered an OSP scholarship."
Milwaukee longitudinal study:
"Dr. John Warren of the University of Minnesota found that students in the MPCP had an 82% graduation rate in 2009, compared with 70% in Milwaukee Public Schools. MPCP ranked higher than MPS in graduation rate in six of the seven years in the study. A report from the University of Arkansas estimated that MPCP saved taxpayers $37.2 million in 2009, because the size of the voucher is significantly smaller than per-pupil spending in MPS."
tony newbill
Petar Ivanov
Wasn't serfdom when knights and lords ran self sufficient castles without much trade?
Mary M. 100+
Parents already have the ability to choose how, when, where, and what their kids learn. It is called home schooling. There are thousands of families in each state who homeschool their children.
And, even though homeschooled children are not using the public school funds, their parents continue to pay taxes that fund public education. You would think that this extra money floating around would help with the economy right?
Petar Ivanov
With vouchers, home schooling parents with 2 students would be getting that $16000 of voucher money going directly into their pocket every year. That $16,000 is likely to be spent by the parents on their children.
I think putting $8000 of education money into the hands of the parents and students opens a $400B/yr market for education.
Do you think home schooling parents would benefit if they received $8000/yr/student to assist in their education efforts?
Mary M. 100+
I'll tell you a quick experience from when I started my career.
The state I live in decided to promote the idea of a lottery. Do you know how they got the voters to pass the law allowing lotteries? The "powers that be" promised the voters that the money collected from the lottery would help fund education, and that every teacher would have the materials she needed to teach effectively. Schools would lack nothing!!! All the teachers and parents were so excited, and they all got in line to vote for a lottery.
Well, guess what? The lottery law passed.....it's been over 20 years since our state has a lottery.
Sadly, the education system is now worse than ever. Because as soon as the money started coming in from the lottery, the budget for education was reduced.
It's like the prices on goods in the stores during the early part of the year. All the merchants know people will be getting tax refund checks, so what do they do? They raise the prices on merchandise.
This also happens at the beginning of each month, when people get their food stamps and welfare checks. Food prices magically go up the first week of each month....hmmmm I wonder why?
We live in a selfish world, run by imperfect humans. Power corrupts, money corrupts, and although your idea is a wonderful one Petar, I know you gave it alot of thought. Nevertheless, money is just that, money. It comes and goes. And education is a life long thing, not dependent on schools.
Homeschooling families are very special. Parents take on the task to homeschool motivated by love of their childen, not by a check from the government. A homeschool education is in a sense, "priceless".
Thank you for letting me share my personal view on your topic.
Petar Ivanov
I am quite certain the $8000, $16000, $24000 would have greatly assist in educating your children. Would you misappropriate it as a homeschooler?! Cheat your own children?!
The government should stop fleecing home schoolers, but respect and assist homeschoolers by sending a check that represents the amount$/child not used in public schooling.
Your story with the lottery is another great example of what happens when politicians are given money! If that lottery money was distributed evenly to all K-12 students and added on top of the $8000 voucher, more money to parents and students that would likely go to education.
Power corrupts, and money corrupts, yes I completely agree. More money, more power, more corruption. That is why it is absolutely necessary to get $458.3 billion dollars of education money out of the hands of a few politicians! Power and money belong in the hands of the people, not in the hands of politicians!
Mary M. 100+
In reality, this might not be the case at all.
Brock Hardwood
"out of the hands of a few politicians..."
We elected those politicians, and they gave us an education system that costs half the price of private schools, achieves similar results, all while having transparent curriculum standards.
Petar Ivanov
One student: $8000
Two students: $16000
Three students: $24000
$8000 per student.
Are you being paid to post by a teachers union? Who is paying you to spin, spread lies and post misinformation here?
Mike Colera 10+
Petar Ivanov
Online schools are great. Vouchers are just handing $8000 of cash into the hands of the parents and students, they use that money to buy home schooling, online schooling, tutoring, an apprenticeship or an internship. They don't have to choose a school. Most of the commentators here are so locked into the idea of "schooling" and "schools" they simply can't wrap their heads around an open education market: anything goes. It's like the East Germans asking if the private industry can run better cafeterias. Food services is not just cafeterias. Education is not just schooling.
For science and arts, garage inventors and artists in studios could offer classes to students. The art niche would be filled very quickly by freelance artists.
Brock Hardwood
Brock Hardwood
They claim that the poor will finally be able to attend the same schools as the children of wealthy families, but it simply isn't true. Top private school tuition can cost as much as $40,000 a year. An $8,000 voucher leaves poor families $32,000 short of ever being able to send their kids to the same school. This is $32,000 they don't have, and as such would never be able to take advantage of it.
There are schools that cost significantly less, but they simply can't afford to provide a robust and flexible curriculum tailored to the individual strengths and weaknesses of each student, nor can they adequately prepare your children for college. For them, it is simply more cost effective to buy 30 bibles and teach theology, then it is to build fully functioning physics, chemistry, and biology labs and staff them with knowledgeable teachers.
http://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/06/22/private-school-tuition-hits-the-stratosphere-40-000-per-year/
Petar Ivanov
-Tax money comes from high income earners, big ticket buyers, and profitable companies. Vouchers are taking money away in the form of taxes from the wealthy and redistributing 99% of it to the 99%. It takes money from the rich and puts it into the hands of the poor.
-Vouchers give $8000 to the poor to spend on education instead of $0 they currently get .
-Vouchers give the poor the opportunity to choose any public school. The poor are currently locked into a public school by zip code.
-$8000 a student; 10 students is $80,000. 1000 hours of instructional teaching is $80/hr for a group tutor on 10 students.
Do you understand that food stamps are not designed so the poor can eat in 5-star hotel lobbies every day?
It's quite sad that you feel disgusted that Christians, Muslims, Jews, and Hindus providing their children with a religious education. Jefferson wrote extensively on how government should not interfere with religion, and here you are trying to mandate the stopping of religious education? "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof". With vouchers, all of your blind-faith Atheists will finally have a market to open schools for Atheists.
What is it about religious liberty and freedom that you don't understand Brock?
Brock Hardwood
That is partly true, but it is irrelevant.
"Vouchers give $8000 to the poor to spend on education instead of $0 they currently get ."
If the poor can't afford the remaining tuition, it gives them nothing.
"Vouchers give the poor the opportunity to choose any public school."
And then funds that school with less money. From your numbers, current public school costs $9,166. Your entire argument is that vouchers save money. They simply don't.
"What is it about religious liberty and freedom that you don't understand Brock?"
You are more than welcome to fund your own religious choices with your own personal income.
Don Anderson 20+
Oh yes giving them back a little so their kids can pays the education cost of you grandkids is totally wrong.
Brock Hardwood
Zac Sebastian
Education doesn't cost 40,000 a year just because thats what Andover charges for it... and if you think that our entrepreneurial community can't figure out a way to educate grade school students for under ten thousand a year then you haven't been paying much attention to what this website is about... Also for people who would prefer to send their kids to a school that costs 20k they're still having to take into consideration that the true cost is closer to 30k because they're still paying taxes towards a system they aren't using.
The most compelling point I think about vouchers is that it removes the monopoly the federal government has on our most precious resource, namely the developing minds of our youth... and just like they taught me in public schools growing up... when real competition doesn't exist the consumer suffers and that is the most basic truth about why our education system is subpar.
shawn disney 10+
Petar Ivanov
Day care centers 6:30-18:30 are $200 a week? $8000 voucher, 40 weeks? That takes care of K-5.
Brock,
Do you want to regulate supermarkets to make sure people don't buy Kosher food with their food stamps?
Shawn,
With vouchers, Jews and Asians who are American citizens would be free to choose to use their $8000 of voucher money at schools run by people that actually value education. No longer would they be forced into a public school attended by and run by non-Asian and non-Jew politicians, teachers, students, and parents who don't value education. What are your thoughts on that?
timothy schlotter
Petar Ivanov
Anyone with vouchers can choose to attend the same public school they have been going to. The difference is that the parents and students have the choice in schooling, and not politicians.
Implicit in your assumption is that private schooling is more effective and desirable than the existing public schools and that parents and students would choose the private ones. Would you want to be able to choose a school that was better for you and your children?
timothy schlotter
Petar Ivanov
timothy schlotter
Don Anderson 20+
So about the federal government getting totally out of offline education, and restricted to online only.
Cities and states run offline schools as they see fit, and use the national online education system as they see fit.
With a national online K-12+ a grade-A would meaningful no matter what offline school you attended.
In fact going to a poor school should make an online-A even more meaningful.
Brock Hardwood
Don Anderson 20+
Is there any rules/laws preventing states or cities from switching to vouchers?
Petar Ivanov
Brock Hardwood
The average cost of private school is $20,000 a year. Of course, the really good ones can cost more than $40,000 a year.
http://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/06/22/private-school-tuition-hits-the-stratosphere-40-000-per-year/
Public education makes sense. The results are similar, yet costs (according to Petar's ted conversation: $458.3 billion / 50 million K-12 students ) are only $9,166
Petar Ivanov
I chose $8000 as a bare minimum to have fun with frugality. It's easy as pie when every K-12 student is handed $20,000 a year for 1,000 instructional hours of learning.
If the voucher money was set to $20,000, then everyone would have the money to attend a secular private school at the current elitist prices. That might make vouchers more appealing to you. Then secular schools would have a market and could scale. They can't right now because government has a monopoly on education.
When the government ran the food service industry in East Germany, there were upscale restaurants for the political elite. This mimics the private schooling prices in America. The American education system is socialist, centrally planned, and run by the politicians just like the East German schooling and food cafeterias.
Central planners and socialists believed the population was better off with government running cafeterias for the entire country. They thought the population would starve if the food service industry was opened to the market. They brought up the same concerns people do here: The rich and greedy will rob, steal, and cheat the vulnerable. The poor are helpless. The masses are stupid. The masses are too incompetent. Government provides healthier food than parents can for their own children. Government knows better than parents what's good for their children to eat. The result was starvation and malnutrition.
The natural experiment in governing policies fared much better in West Berlin... but those results were unseen by everyone blocked by the wall, and the same things are unforeseen with changing the American education system.
Turning America away from East German education requires:
-Government to finance education, but not manage, not operate.
-Politicians removed from education money and decisions.
-Education money and liberty put into the hands of the parents and students so they can choose when, what, where, how, and who teachers them.
Mike Colera 10+
I liked your your comments and comparisons to East Germany, I lived in West Germany from the mid 80's until 05. I got to look over the fence when it was up and again when it was down. Here is what I observed. The USSR was seen here as a dictatorship. They said they were a workers socialist government looking out for the working class (middle class?). What I saw was " Plato's Republic "
in it's worse form. Is there a lesson here for all of us?
Petar Ivanov
Brock Hardwood
It is clear that government is capable of operating more efficiently than the private sector when it comes to education. It achieves similar results as private institutions, all the while maintaining open admissions and providing more choices for the students. All for less than half the price of a private education.
You can try to drum up classic Soviet fears, but it is free market economics where you fail. It simply costs less to continue with public education. 9k is less than 20k. The math is clear, your ted-conversation argument is moot.
Checkmate.
Petar Ivanov
You write with an agenda to undermine religion, and your anti-religious bigotry is coming out quite nicely. It's unbelievable that moderators have not removed you from this conversation.
You wrote earlier "Properly funded public schools out perform private schools." So I raised the price of vouchers to $20,000 to see your response. And what did you do? You start lying. You are again twisting my words, spinning my context, replying to comments designated for me with patently false information, and lying about math not adding up.
You do not write out of good faith, or out of curiosity, or out of desire to improve education. You are blinded by a religious-hate agenda.
Brock Hardwood
Increasing vouchers to $20k increases the cost of education. Once again, this is based on YOUR numbers. It is almost as if you were incapable of understanding your OWN arguments.
It is not my agenda to undermine religion, it is YOUR agenda to use tax dollars to fund it. I am simply defending the establishment cause of the 1st amendment. You, however, are mocking it.
Varlan Allan 10+
The average teacher's salary (nation wide) is $50,000. $50,000/180 days = $277.77/per day/30 students=$9.25/6.5 hours = $1.42 per hour per student--a very inexpensive baby-sitter and they even EDUCATE your kids!) WHAT A DEAL!!!!
Make a teacher smile; re-post this to show appreciation ♥ all you out there!
From a friend in Canada
Petar Ivanov
The average cost of K-12 education in Pennsylvania is over $12,000.
-Kindergarten class of 30 students, $360,000/yr; 1000 instructional hours.
-1000 instructional hours; $360/hr for an excellent tutor.
-Teachers paid $50,000.
Supporters of the politicians and central planners of public schooling, please justify the $310,000.