Why don't we just make the kids take tests to determine who is smarter and put them in the better schools. That way you put more money into kids that are going to make better use of the schools. Put the less smart kids in the cheaper schools as they aren't going to do as well anyway.
obama is skilled at hiding stuff like this i just what other has been brushed under the rug sort of speak
i also agree with some of the other commentors on several things in particular that the money should be assigned to a student not a school so that the schools have to actually produce so students will go there
Money should be attached to a student and not a school. Schools should have to wine & dine you to get you to come to their school. If they want your business. If they don't, they can just watch their students go away to the competition. Easy.
I see stories on the news all the time where they have "lotteries" for entry into charter schools, and people are happy to have "won".
Is a good education supposed to be a prize to be won in a contest?
Education should be a service, and people in a free market system should be able to offer a service to people willing to VOLUNTARILY hand over money to pay for it.
Competition for funds will breed excellence. Why can't these democrat fucktards see this...
Private schools require nearly half of what public schools require to teach a child, yet they get the same results of better. Vouchers would increase the quality of education while saving more tax dollars for other uses.
uggghhh schools aren't businesses that keep trade secrets from each other and try to compete, education is a cooperative effort.
The problem with charters and vouchers (which is virtually the same thing now) is that "school choice" works both ways in that schools can kick out low performing students to make thier status look better (as opposed to actually teaching those that aren't doing well).
Also a Stanford study came out and said that Charter schools do much worse anyway.
Yeah, schools can kick out low performing students, but they'll have a very limited incentive to do that if the money follows the child. On top of that, people might not want to send their kids to a school that would expel their students over a string of low grades.
But a voucher definitely shouldn't cover all of the tuition. Charter schools aren't exactly what I'm talking about, although they do receive money on a per student basis.
Well at least from what I heard anecdotally there are several vouchers/charters that basically only keep 4.0 students to better their performance.
Also curiously what is the difference between Vouchers and Charters (at least in theory). Because the charter movement got hijacked from the original ideals into what basiclly amounts to vouchers.
Vouchers are supposed to give low-income families a much larger "market" of both private and public schools to choose from. But it does run the risk of increasing the price of private education IMHO.
Charters just seem like public schools with better incentives.
Hope and change. Of course the democratic propoganda minstry (read CNN, MSNBC, ABC, etc) will never let this story see the light of day. This is a victory for greedy teacher unions, and leftist ideologues. Obama can afford private education for his kids but he couldn't care less about poor families that can't. Keith Olbermann, I dare you to defend Obama for this. Jeanine Garofalo, I dare you to call anyone who points out this petty act of political pandering a racist.
It is a sad day for children who are growing up in public education.
I graduated from the public school system and knew a lot of peers who could not write very well. "Sound it out," they would be told, "and write what you say." Nowhere was a dictionary placed into the equation, nor the hands of students.
& i srsly do not liek ppl on teh intarwebz or ppl ur txtng wif & think they r speeling gud cuz its not, u no?
We need a political system made of people who are great doers, not great orators.
Assholes. They'd rather children in DC (and elsewhere) be stuck in shitty public systems with bureaucrats who don't jack shit running things, along with teachers' unions stifling any meaningful progress.
Free the students to go to the school they want to go to and you free their minds.
azulo65 2 years ago 3
Why don't we just make the kids take tests to determine who is smarter and put them in the better schools. That way you put more money into kids that are going to make better use of the schools. Put the less smart kids in the cheaper schools as they aren't going to do as well anyway.
Martian74 2 years ago
obama is skilled at hiding stuff like this i just what other has been brushed under the rug sort of speak
i also agree with some of the other commentors on several things in particular that the money should be assigned to a student not a school so that the schools have to actually produce so students will go there
jon8917 2 years ago
Money should be attached to a student and not a school. Schools should have to wine & dine you to get you to come to their school. If they want your business. If they don't, they can just watch their students go away to the competition. Easy.
marco114 2 years ago 2
Vouchers are a step in the right direction.
But we need a separation of education and state.
Reason Mag. is great!
freesk8 2 years ago 6
I see stories on the news all the time where they have "lotteries" for entry into charter schools, and people are happy to have "won".
Is a good education supposed to be a prize to be won in a contest?
Education should be a service, and people in a free market system should be able to offer a service to people willing to VOLUNTARILY hand over money to pay for it.
MooseOfReason 2 years ago 3
Competition for funds will breed excellence. Why can't these democrat fucktards see this...
Private schools require nearly half of what public schools require to teach a child, yet they get the same results of better. Vouchers would increase the quality of education while saving more tax dollars for other uses.
Morrakiu 2 years ago 4
@Morrakiu
uggghhh schools aren't businesses that keep trade secrets from each other and try to compete, education is a cooperative effort.
The problem with charters and vouchers (which is virtually the same thing now) is that "school choice" works both ways in that schools can kick out low performing students to make thier status look better (as opposed to actually teaching those that aren't doing well).
Also a Stanford study came out and said that Charter schools do much worse anyway.
AndroidPolitician 1 year ago
Yeah, schools can kick out low performing students, but they'll have a very limited incentive to do that if the money follows the child. On top of that, people might not want to send their kids to a school that would expel their students over a string of low grades.
But a voucher definitely shouldn't cover all of the tuition. Charter schools aren't exactly what I'm talking about, although they do receive money on a per student basis.
Morrakiu 1 year ago
Well at least from what I heard anecdotally there are several vouchers/charters that basically only keep 4.0 students to better their performance.
Also curiously what is the difference between Vouchers and Charters (at least in theory). Because the charter movement got hijacked from the original ideals into what basiclly amounts to vouchers.
AndroidPolitician 1 year ago
Vouchers are supposed to give low-income families a much larger "market" of both private and public schools to choose from. But it does run the risk of increasing the price of private education IMHO.
Charters just seem like public schools with better incentives.
Morrakiu 1 year ago
Public schools are not about education, they are centers of indoctrination.
Shame it's such a sham.
PressForFreedom 2 years ago 12
Hope and change. Of course the democratic propoganda minstry (read CNN, MSNBC, ABC, etc) will never let this story see the light of day. This is a victory for greedy teacher unions, and leftist ideologues. Obama can afford private education for his kids but he couldn't care less about poor families that can't. Keith Olbermann, I dare you to defend Obama for this. Jeanine Garofalo, I dare you to call anyone who points out this petty act of political pandering a racist.
NoEoAoRo 2 years ago 10
lol public education is so funny. Good enough for your kids, but apparently not good enough for politician's kids.
0bodobod0 2 years ago 8
It is a sad day for children who are growing up in public education.
I graduated from the public school system and knew a lot of peers who could not write very well. "Sound it out," they would be told, "and write what you say." Nowhere was a dictionary placed into the equation, nor the hands of students.
& i srsly do not liek ppl on teh intarwebz or ppl ur txtng wif & think they r speeling gud cuz its not, u no?
We need a political system made of people who are great doers, not great orators.
Quelkaima 2 years ago 6
Hey, this is the same anchor who interviewed Gene Healy. Is this the DC local news program?
CountArtha 2 years ago
Assholes. They'd rather children in DC (and elsewhere) be stuck in shitty public systems with bureaucrats who don't jack shit running things, along with teachers' unions stifling any meaningful progress.
whoo689 2 years ago 6
Another gov't institution that has failed miserably - unfortunately using tax billions to pay for bureaucracy and keep education very expensive.
pulpBleacher 2 years ago 2
WOW...I thought that democrats are for a "better future for our children"...I guess not
unodepoalli 2 years ago 10
politics as usual, one day it will implode in our faces.
darkwhitedirewolf 2 years ago 9