Privatizing Public Schools

Agreed.

Let me illustrate how all this works, not necessarily charter schools only, but how the game is played overall, by telling about the school district my children attended.

In 2001 Bush II started No Child Left Behind. It was put into effect 2003. In 2004 Bush looked around for a model school to show off how well NCLB was doing.
He found one in PA and visited it 2004 making a big televised speech to a select, invitation only audience (Republican except for select students); telling the nation how well the program was going.
My son was a student at this school at the time and attended this speech. (BTW Bush brought his own out house.)

The school was chosen because it was consistently preforming well according to the NCLB criteria, 98% of its teachers were rated highly qualified under NCLB, its graduation rate was around 92%, its sports teams were consistent winners, violence and disruptive behavior were negligible, its faculty and administration were very satisfied with their jobs, and parental support was high. It was said that "The school ran itself", meaning the principals could leave the building at will as it ran on automatic, never encountering waves.

It was in a large, rich, suburban district.
But the interesting thing is the district had two high schools. We'll call one North High and one South High.

Bush visited North High, he didn't visit South High.

South High was not meeting the NCLB criteria, its sports teams were consistent loosers, violence and disruptive behavior were much worse then its sister school, North High; faculty and administrators were disgruntled, and parental involvement was low.
The principals were seldom in the building not because they weren't needed, but because they were often needed in court over some type of discipline, expulsion, or other matter.

Even more interesting is the fact that the two high schools were only physically 1/2 mile apart.

Anyone want to guess why there was such a difference between the two schools even though they were in the same district, under the same central administration and school board, and were only 1/2 of a mile apart??????
​

 

First, what are you saying with your statistics?

Second, in response to your question, it is a bad thing because the public schools are left with the task of educating everyone including the lowest performing members of society. They have no other choice, they can not turn anyone away.
Private schools, magnet schools, charter schools, home schoolers, religious schools all get to choose who they teach and can reject anyone they want. That is fine, as far as it goes, but then some of them, and the politicians, and others, have the guts to compare their results with the results of the public schools.

So they point to the success of the "alternative" schooling techniques, which btw are not statistically valid anyway, and use that line of bull to claim that the public schools are inferior compared to the others. They then use that line to siphon needed funds from the public system, leading them to soldier on with even less.
Going back to my football analogy, instead of raising the LCD of both teams, we concentrate of helping the one made up of professional players and leave the other one to flounder on its own. Then we praise the same winning team every year, deride the team that can't keep up and use it as an excuse to draw off more of their funds and give those funds to the pros.

If you notice in your statistics:
AVERAGE DISTRICT PUBLIC SCHOOL PER PUPIL EXPENDITURE: $13,041
AVERAGE PRIVATE SCHOOL TUITION: $8,549
AVERAGE PUBLIC CHARTER SCHOOL PER PUPIL EXPENDITURE: $8,001
AVERAGE CATHOLIC SCHOOL TUITION: $6,018

If we average the cost of educating a private, charter, and Catholic student, we get an average cost of $7,522 per student. Public schools spend $13,041, that's $5,519 per student more!
Why is that? Detractors of the public system use statistics like this to show how inefficient and wasteful public systems are, a waste of tax money, etc. etc.

Now tell me, why do they spend more per student?

I don't expect anyone to answer as no one seems to be able to figure out why the two high schools I mentioned in my last post have such different results even though they are only 1/2 mile apart, are in the same district, have the same tax base, and have the same school board and central ad min.

 

Quote:
​

Originally Posted by Meagain
Second, in response to your question, it is a bad thing because the public schools are left with the task of educating everyone including the lowest performing members of society. They have no other choice, they can not turn anyone away.

Public schools have never had, and still don't have students with similar learning abilities. Private schools usually do.
That was one of my points.

Let me explain how the law constrains public schools.

At one time students were tracked, that is they were placed in classes based on their ability and/or educational goals. So there might have been a college prep, general, and business track. Classes were homogenous, that is everyone in the class had the same basic skills and ability. This means that the class can be tailored to the students. While Algebra I may be offered in the college and general track, the general Algebra I class may move slower than the college one. Instructional methods may be different, and as much ground may not be covered. Special ed students were isolated and educated separately.

Tracking was abolished in the early 70's and heterogeneous grouping of classes introduced. This was, I believe a Liberal idea, all students should be treated the same. Now teachers were faced with teaching students of mixed abilities and skills in the same room, at the same time. Nothing wrong with that if the teacher to student ratio is kept low, but it doesn't work very well with 25 or 30 students in a class, and a teacher with a load of 150 to 180 students a day at the high school or middle school level.
If the class is to address the higher ability students, the slower students get left behind. If the class is slowed to allow them to catch up with the norm, the higher ability students get bored.
All leading to less progress for either the slowest, fastest, or even the norm students. In addition either the slower or faster students are always bored.
So now we start to get discipline problems, as idle hands are the devil's workshop, as they say.

Private schools were never mandated to institute homogeneous grouping, and further, as they can expel anyone at any time there is no incentive to retain poor students, unless they are in financial trouble. If they are in financial trouble they are probably not a good private school anyway due to the law of competition that free market schoolers like to push.

And this led to the next big step in public education, Inclusion.
Inclusion resulted from the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. And it resulted in the national IEP. IEPs are mandated for all public schools, but no private ones. An IEP is an Individual Educational Program tailored to anyone deemed to have some type of educational disability.
A parent, doctor, teacher, counselor, coach, etc. may recommend a student for an IEP.

What type of disabilities could earn an IEP? Dyslexia, poor academic achievement, not meeting potential, poor auditory, visual, gross, or fine motor skills, poor audiology, ADD, social/emotional problems, poor health, mental disorders, etc. All must be evaluated for free and then addressed for free, at no extra cost to the student. The cost is absorbed by the tax payer.

Private schools do not have to do this.

So what we now have is a profusion of IEPs, as every parent wants the best education possible for their child, as they should.
What this means for the teacher is that they now must tailor lesson plans to individual students. Instead of teaching to a homogenous group of students, they are now confronted with classes of individuals.
The teacher must now place certain students in certain areas of the classroom due to hearing, sight, attention, or behavior problems. There are only so many seats in the front. Some students must be read to, some students can read on their own, some must be provided with written notes, as they can't take them themselves, some have to be given study guides, some can't take fill in the blank tests, some can't take multiple choice tests, some have to have multiple choice tests, but can only have three choices, some can only take matching tests, some have to have "wrap arounds" due to behavior problems, (a wrap around is their own private adult who follows them around to correct behavior), some can't speak English, so they need special tests, notes, and study guides, etc. etc.
And the teacher still has a load of 150 to 180, or more, students a day.

So as the Conservatives siphon off money to give to the unregulated elite private schools, the public schools are left with spending extraordinary amounts of money to comply with the new mandates designed to improve all students.

Doesn't work that way. There are only so many dollars to go around. In 2011-2012 our governor cut $1.1 billion in basic educational funds while allowing tax credits to businesses that support private schools (as well as some public programs) and pushing legislation for more tax vouchers for private schools for business and private citizens.

On one had they mandate that the public schools spend more money per student then they give they less and in addition take some of that and give it private schools who have no legal obligation to spend any more per student anyway.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Meagain
Why is that? Detractors of the public system use statistics like this to show how inefficient and wasteful public systems are, a waste of tax money, etc. etc.

I don't want to hear it, because it is an inaccurate interpretation of data. You post some data, which is great, I'm glad someone around here has the balls to do that. But then you walk away from it and refuse to tell us your interpretation of it. You leave it to someone who is impressed by unexplained data to draw conclusions.

I explained how I interpret it, Now someone tell me where I'm wrong.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Meagain
Now tell me, why do they spend more per student?

You do know that public schools are also required to provide free busing for religious schools and axillary services free of charge, except to the taxpayer, to all religious and private schools? They must absorb the cost themselves, which pushes up their cost per student, in addition to all the above.
​

​

So what don't you follow???​

 

The district must provide an education if the parents can not. In the past what would happen is that districts would trade students. The student would be sent to another district, which in return would have the option of doing the same. The expulsion rate was low due to the fact that there were few problems in society or the schools after WWII. At the end beginning of the seventies the expulsion rate jumped. When a student is expelled, the district must still pay for his or her education, if the parent can not, as stated above.

If they are not removed, the entire academic setting is destroyed.

These are PA stats.

Sure, I support the right to private and religious schools...just not with tax money.

You can't have it both ways. If you (not you in particular) want to claim that private schools are so superior, there should be no complaint about their cost. In addition private school voucher proponents are always yelling about the free market and competition, but they then complain about the private schools costing too much so they want public money. If they can't compete with the public system get out of the business. Simple. Public schools are regulated and must provide basic schooling and freedoms to every student, private schools are much better at denying basic student freedoms and well rounded educations.

While the local taxes could be used for fewer public students, state and federal funds are granted based on the school population. Removing students from public schools means less state and federal funds for those schools. In addition the local tax money is now used for vouchers, which go to the private schools, albeit they will "buy" more student education there.

Thanks for responding Indie, am I making any sense?. This is a complicated issue that has no easy solutions.

 

Absolutely.

No more than the childless adult or the adults past childbearing age whose young no longer attend school. We all live in the same society.

Again I must point out, $5,519 is the average per student. Once you remove the best and richest students from the public schools the cost of educating the ones left behind will escalate per student because the ones left behind are the ones that cost the most to educate. The "at risk" students are the ones that need remedial reading, one on one tutoring, wrap arounds, smaller class sizes, English as a second language classes, free breakfasts and lunches, busing, etc. And then the district looses, by your stats 56.2% of its funding per student for each of the students it looses. And then it still must pay the same for upkeep of the same buildings, teachers, administrators, all the additional teacher aides, security systems and police patrols and so forth that private schools don't need as they have little at risk students or disciple problems.
And remember they get free busing, free gym usage, athletic fields, etc., and IDEA must evaluate any private student reported to a public district and develop an ISP for that student at the district's cost.
However, the private school doesn't have to give that student any Special education. So what happens? the parent pulls the kid from private school and sends them back to public school for free special ed.

_________

​

Homogenous grouping can be done in public schools and heterogeneous grouping in private schools. It has nothing to do with funding...other than the public schools are regulated and the private aren't. I would just improve the public schools and leave the private ones alone.
If you want public funding of private schools then they must fall under the same public regulation as public schools.

I vote for my representatives at the local, state, and federal level. I help to select those that I feel can best address the needs of the youth in my area. In order to vote, I must also pay taxes. But my payment of taxes at least allows me the illusion that through my vote I have a say in how my money is spent in regards to education. I also can attend my local school board meetings and voice my concerns.

If my tax money is diverted to a religious or private school I have no say in how that school is run at all, unless I happen to have a student in that school or belong to that religion.

I have no choice.
​

What would stop a private or religious school from using my tax money in a way I find totally inappropriate and meanwhile give me no avenue to voice my concerns? Again, at least with a public system, I get a chance to vote for representatives who I feel will serve my best interests.

I am totally amazed that people don't understand that private and religious schools are almost completely unregulated and not responsible to society in general. While public schools may indoctrinate students, and they do, they do it in a way that has been agreed upon by the majority of our society.

Private and religious schools indoctrinate also, any way they want.

The choice is, do you want your public money to be used to find solutions to the problems in public schools or do want public money to be used by non public entities to finance religious doctrine and private world views that may or may not agree with your views or the views of overall society.

Why do private schools need public money??? I really don't understand!​

 

In the public area that would be called a Magnet school. They were set up by the public school system for just such those concerns. Magnet schools like all other schools can be discriminatory or not, good or bad, depending on how they are set up.

Well, it's hard to find stats on this issue. But you are making the assumption that the vouchers will only go to new students enrolling in private schools. In other words the vouchers can also go to those already in private schools resulting in no loss of those students from the public schools, just the tax money. You assume that class sizes will be reduced, they may not depending on the circumstances. Teachers are already being furloughed due to budget cuts resulting in higher class sizes not lower. You are assuming that a large portion of the pubic school children would move to private schools. Currently private schools account for about 10% of the educational needs of the nation. That is 3 students from a class of 30. Not much of a reduction in class size. Finally, you are assuming that consistency of teaching materials and quality can not be achieved in any other way.

Not true, there are private schools that also concentrate on special needs students and charge accordingly. Public schools do not have the option of charging more only for special needs students.

If.

You are advocating the redirection of tax funds from non-profit educational systems whose primary role is the education of students with no profit, to help fund private systems whose primary purpose is to make money at a profit (or they would not exist) and to whom education is only a secondary goal.
Or/and redirecting those funds to non profit religious or private schools that do not pay taxes and whose primary goal is the advancement of their own values and beliefs, with the other areas of education taking a secondary place.

Fine, just do it without redirecting my tax money.

So you are not advocating any governmental regulation of private and religious schools? The government should give them public tax money, but the private parents get to decide how they educate? Should they be required to teach science? How about health, some religions don't believe in modern scientific medicine and health procedures. Where do we draw the line once the private schools start taking public money?

Really? Those without children are to be treated as second class citizens even though they live in the same society? In public schools all citizens are guaranteed involvement.
In addition choice has always been available, anyone can attend a private school.....if they will let them.

Yes, there should be public and private schools. As far as the spending of tax money, there is a difference in spending it for the benifit of all the public and the spending for private profit or religious concerns.

Again, we already have traditional public schools, magnet schools, religious schools, charter schools, home schooling, and private schools. Lots of choice. Just leave my tax money alone in regards to private enterprises and religions.

Fine, and don't send my tax money either.

Again, if you disagree with the public system, go to a private system. But don't mandate that my tax money also goes to a private system.

Wrong. The government mandates a free regulated education which has been deemed proper by society at large. It does not mandate a religious education (separation of church and state) nor does it mandate an education based on private concerns which may or may not conflict with the norms agreed upon by mainstream society.

 

Continuing...and thanks for the debate!

So you are suggesting a tax credit, refund, whatever, to all school age households to be applied any way they want? Would this be on a per child basis? All children treated the same or a sliding scale as to educational needs and economic incomes?
Isn't that the same as just lowering the tax rate for households with school age children? In other words more taxes for those with no school age children.

Sliding scale vouchers. First you are assuming that private schools provide the same education and services as public schools. You haven't shown that, in fact I believe I have pointed out that private schools already receive many benefits free of charge from the private schools which they must pay for. Public schools already subsidize the private schools.
How do these lower income households get their children to these private schools? Do they use public school buses, or drive them there themselves? How is a voucher going to allow a lower income family to enroll their child at very little or no cost? Are you suggesting that these vouchers pay the entire, or most of, the tuition?

If you can pull this off, I'll vote for you when you run for President. State and Federal funds to public schools are being cut now due to lack of tax revenue and you propose to give public schools less by diverting their tax money to private schools, then make up the loss difference by giving them more tax money??????

They can now.

There is only so much tax money. So I assume you mean that we would continue to fund public schools at their present level by doing away with the per student allocation of tax money. This means that you must come up with a new formula for the distribution of federal and state tax monies to different districts. That's fine, we already give grants for that purpose. Now, what is your plan? Also where do we get the additional funds? What programs are you going to cut to get the additional educational money?

Public are non-profit, private are for profit.

I found the stats you quoted on Watchdog.org.

The Indeed job placement service list the average as $52,000. HVAC technician, $53,000. Dedicated local truck driver $56,000. Regional truck driver $59,000, Electrical engineer, $70,000. Plus bennies, all in Philly. Just for comparison.

Okay, let's hear the minimum standards. As monkjr has pointed out private schools presently are excluded form guaranteeing certain Constitutional rights to their students now, while public schools are required to do so, such as freedom of expression and speech, for one.

So what's the minimum? Do we loosen up the regs for public schools or increase them for private ones?

In the public sector all citizens take responsibility for the education of youth.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Meagain
Again, we already have traditional public schools, magnet schools, religious schools, charter schools, home schooling, and private schools. Lots of choice. Just leave my tax money alone in regards to private enterprises and religions.

Every voucher system that I have seen takes money that is ear marketed for public education and redirects it to private. Even if new funds are found my tax money, which could be spent on public infrastructure etc., will be redirected into the private sector.

I assume this is a joke.

So what, I'd cut the military myself.

Federal funds come from ESEA grants, ISEA funds, and Medicare provisions. Local and state sources and allocations vary by state.