Vouchers: Taking an amount of tax dollars that would be spent on a per pupil basis for a public school, and giving that outlay to a parent to spend on an private school.

What entitles a school district to exclusive acceptance of our tax dollars?

And please don't go into the separation of Church and State. You lost that argument when you attempted to make nuns and Catholic hospitals give birth control options to patients.

Tim: Your blog is a much needed shot of common sense. It is no coincidence that the public school teachers union is called the "teachers union", rather than "what is best for the students union", as their primary goal is what is best for the teachers, rather than what is best for the students. We have big inner city schools that have been failing the students for decades, where teachers get tenure after two years, and then spend 30 years dialing it in, simply getting a paycheck, and resisting any attempts by the parents to truly help educate the children. Most inner city parents can not afford to move to a better neighborhood where a better education can be received, and thus the cycle of lack of education and lack of a future remains.

The Democrats depend on the "teachers union" to be a strong ally in raising money and getting votes for their liberal politicians, in exchange for fighting any candidates who support school vouchers or giving inner city parents a choice in where their children go to school. I respect the Trump administration in putting forward a leader who truly wants to put the students and their parents first, not the public school teachers union, by allowing school vouchers and school choice as a solution to breaking the cycle of poverty and cycle of lack of education.

Of course, liberals, especially liberal bloggers at the Danville Weekly, like to attack Trump's choices for cabinet positions, claiming there is something wrong in appointing individuals who have been successful in their careers and made fortunes BEFORE working for the government, unlike the Clinton's and Obama's who had no wealth until AFTER working for the government and then suddenly became very wealthy. I admire people who are already wealthy and later seek public service, rather than those who sought public service to allow them to become wealthy.

DKHSK,

Public schools must accommodate every student in a school district while private schools can screen who they let in. Some children have special needs that require them to be sent to specialized schools. If the child is in a public school the district ends up paying the bill while if they're in a private school the parents are informed their child can no longer attend the private school. That's the extreme scenario, but many children now have specialized needs that have to be accommodated which means more expenses to the public school.

Chris,

That there are "special needs" children is besides the point, and as you clearly noted - "the extreme scenario".

Vouchers are simply an alternative to how taxes are used. Public school funding takes an amount of taxes, and allocates that funding to pay for direct teaching, infrastructure overhead, admin, special programs, union membership...etc. The net net of all this is broken down to a "cost per pupil".

Vouchers simply takes a PORTION of some (not all) of the items I just mentioned, and gives it to the student for use in a private school. The funding for special ed can and should be EXCLUDED when factoring in what the value of the voucher should be.

Now, one might say, "but if enough students leave a school, then the teachers might get laid off!" They'd be right, that could very well happen. But here's the thing: for every school that loses a pupil, another school gains one and what happens next? Those schools need to hire more teachers. Problem solved.

There is no downside to vouchers other than the unions don't get a cut of TAXPAYER money for use in propagating Democrat policies.

Some of us see the starving of those unions as a plus.

DKHSK,

The district paying $30k a year to send a child to a specialized school is the extreme scenario, but about 1 in 10 children receive special services. SO that's not really besides the point.

There is another downside of private schools, they can discriminate in admissions based on academic ability, religion, gender, race and so on. 80% of students attending private schools attend a religious school, so now we're funding Churches with State money.

Oh and if a teacher gets fired by a public school, then they might not even qualify to teach at a private school based on their religion, use of birth control and so on.

Another downside is that private schools can simply raise tuition by the voucher amount, the same parents pay the same amount to the school, and the school get's the voucher money to do what they please with it while all the non-private schools kids end up with less $ to teach them.

Unions are a big problem, but we should fix issues we see with them directly. A federal law forbidding mandatory union dues payment could be a start. Getting rid of the job bidding systems based on seniority would help. Maybe salary adjustments based on the difficulty of a position so that tenured teachers don't take the cushier jobs while new teachers are stuck in schools in very tough neighborhoods.

Chris,

All I've been saying to you is that you're conflating special ed, with that of the average student. I keep telling you special ed doesn't change.

As for private schools discriminating, they can't if they are accepting ANY federal or state funds. I'm surprised you didn't research this fact.

If you're against vouchers, just come out and say it and support it with facts.

Dan

Some facts about private school regulations:

Title IX makes an exception for any school controlled by a religious organization if the law's prohibition on sex discrimination would violate the organization's “religious tenets."

Title VI doesn't include religious discrimination.

For Section 504 private schools receiving federal funds can't exclude qualified students with disabilities or charge them more, as long as only “minor adjustments" are needed to provide an appropriate education.

The nice thing about vouchers is it does take some of the sting out of 'paying twice' for education when you have your child(ren) in private school. Paying tuition AND RE Tax (big chunk for public schools) hurts.
And for those who believe the mere thot of vouchers means somehow it pays for private school, you are sadly confused about how much private tuition costs.

DKHSK - sorry looks like I accidently pasted your name over mine in my above response.

SHale,

You hit the nail on the head, vouchers don't come close to covering the cost of a private school. So the program isn't about giving poor families choices, it is about subsidizing rich families that don't want to send their kids to public schools.

SHale and Chris,

"...vouchers don't come close to covering the cost of a private school."

So now the issue with vouchers is that they supposedly won't cover the cost of private schooling?

Man, I can't keep up with your moving the goalposts all the time!

Yes they will. That you say they won't, doesn't make it so. New, alternative schools like the ones Roz talks about in her post will be created in addition to parochial opportunities.

Next goalpost move?

Dan

Dan,

Devos can only do things at a federal level while Ros is talking about changes that would have to happen at a state level. It appears that we're not even on the same playing field right now, but that's ok.

In the scope of what Devos has control over all she can do is to route Federal funding through vouchers. In CA, that is about $2k per pupil.

In an expanded scope, charter schools are already state funded schools just like traditional public schools paid on a per pupil basis. So federal vouchers wouldn't help their funding.

rich parents? Well, perhaps a percent would be those taking advantage. However, even middle class parents send their kid(s) to private school. I did thru 1st grade and we are so not rich. : )

Dan: What goal post are you blithering about? The FACT is the 'voucher' idea would not cover 100% of private schooling. Anybody who pays private tuition would know that. for me, I liked the idea of vouchers (but it never came to be and most likely won't) is it reduces the paying 'twice' for education. That was it. No goal post installed, moved, built or quoted.
So doesn't matter to me directly any longer since we are in public school in a district rated near the top (for Calif).

SHale,

"The FACT is the 'voucher' idea would not cover 100% of private schooling."

Read this again, SLOWLY: "New, alternative schools like the ones Roz talks about in her post will be created in addition to parochial opportunities."

If that was too subtle for you, nobody controls what amounts a school may charge for education. There are cheaper methods for delivering top notch education. Again, read Roz's post. So your THEORY that vouchers won't be enough, is just that, a THEORY.

Get it now??? Geez.

Stay classy.

A theory? Dude, I know obvious things escape u. Vouchers don't exist and won't, at least in most states.
Regale us with your opinion on vouchers. Which really is vaporware.

We await.

Concerning vouchers, I'm open to new ideas but I've got to ask: Has a system of school vouchers been successfully used in any country? I don't believe that they use school vouchers in Japan, South Korea, or Singapore, which are all countries with successful school programs and very well educated students.

SHale,

First you tell us voucher value won't be enough to cover the cost of private schooling. Then when your "theory" gets shot up full of holes, you now resort to tell us that "Vouchers don't exist and won't, at least in most states."

Um...can you please elucidate us all to why this is so?

What was I saying about moving goal posts?

Stay classy.

"Sam": Yes, Japan, South Korea, and Singapore have successful education systems without vouchers. However, they also do not have teachers unions, and they teach science and math without wasting time on " my three dads" and other social activism dribble indoctrination. They also do not have millions of illegal alien students demanding education in their native language to slow down the learning process. Yes, "Sam", we would not need vouchers and would have a successful education system if we were blessed in having no teachers unions, not wasting time on social activism topics, and not needing to spend resources on teaching in multiple languages to accommodate illegal aliens. I am proud of you, " Sam", you are learning!

@American

So your short answer is that you have no national examples that you can point to that a school voucher system would actually work? That belief that school vouchers will work is a leap of faith? Thanks. That really gives me a lot of confidence that Betsy DeVos, Donald Trump, and people like you know what you're all doing.

Duh: You have yet to explain your blither on 'goal posts'. We are waiting for the reveal.
Still waiting on the amount of $$ assigned to the vaporware vouchers and how that would enable paying for a private school tuition.
Maybe because one hasn't worked out the math yet?

Stay subtle

Sam,

"...you have no national examples that you can point to that a school voucher system would actually work? That belief that school vouchers will work is a leap of faith?"

What Sam would say pre-1960:

"We've never BEEN to the moon, therefore we can NEVER get to the moon."

That's basically how you're reasoning Sammy.

Always fun. :)

Anything is better than the current system of a marginal top-heavy administration with little reaching the classroom where most needed. The Teachers Union is an absolute farce with only self interest as its objective and zero alignment with those the educational system is intended to serve. Absent a competitive alternative there is no incentive for public education to change. This inept self-perpetuating institutional structure needs a serious reset. It's all about performance, cut the bloated overhead, incentive the good teachers in the classrooms, and allow parents to choose. Oh, and get rid of tenure, it's only furtherance of institutional insular mentality and shouldn't exist in the real world. With choice, we certainly can do better.

@DKHSK :"What Sam would say pre-1960: "We've never BEEN to the moon, therefore we can NEVER get to the moon.""

Trolling again, Dan? If you were really as smart as you seem to think that you are, you would immediately seen all the flaws in your argument.

There was a door-to-door evangelist who once came to our door when I was a kid. He argued to me that the theory of evolution was clearly false because "Pencils and pens do not evolve into higher forms of pencils and pens.". My jaw dropped. He then folded his arms while grinning and smiling, obviously quite proud of his keen analytical insight and his superior reasoning skills. That's who you remind me of.

Stay in the shallow end of the pool, Dan.

Sam makes a statement; Dan shows how said statement is illogical; Sam accuses Dan of trolling.

That about sums up that!

Nice chatting with you Sammy!

Dan explains vouchers to SHale; SHale says vouchers will never work; Dan challenges SHale as to how he could know this when in fact, vouchers have never been tried; SHale resorts to insults.

That about sums up that, SHale.

Been fun, though it hasn't.

Vouchers can and will work.

Now the public schools in California operate on the fact that they receive ADA money based upon merely the students showing up for school. It doesn't matter than they are idle or are assigned art projects or are assigned to clean up the cafeteria. Their only motivation is that the students must show up.

In addition, Pleasanton schools constantly give As to almost each and every student after they get in middle school, just like the kids are given 3s all throughout elementary school. This gives the parents a false sense that their kids are doing well. It is not until the PSAT and SAT tests are given and the parents get the scores that they realize Pleasanton schools are full of teachers that time and time again just give As out to almost all students (grade inflation).

By allowing vouchers, the public schools will finally have an incentive to straighten out their miserable schools. Parents can choose to take their dollars and send their kids to other schools.

Private schools always have had an incentive to truly education children. They know that without results, parents will place their kids in other educational settings where their kids are learning.

@Voucher fan :"Vouchers can and will work."

To be quite frank and honest, I don't think that your argument makes much sense or you really gave much thought to the topic. Look at what you did in your post: First, you question parents' lack of judgement by writing that they are easily fooled by grade inflation which "gives the parents a false sense that their kids are doing well". Got that? But then in your argument in favor of school vouchers, whose judgements do you rely on to properly use the school vouchers to select the best schools for the students? No, you don't rely on the judgements of teachers to say how the school vouchers should be used or on the judgements of school principals or education professionals. No, amazingly you do a COMPLETE ABOUT-FACE and claim that all will be right because you imply that PARENTS are best suited to choose which schools to send their kids to using school vouchers!

So why are you so convinced that school vouchers will work when success of the whole school voucher system depends so critically on the good judgements of the very same parents that you say are being so easily fooled by grade inflation? Is there any self-consistency to your arguments? Did it occur to you that private schools can also play the game of grade inflation with parents? Apparently not.

Sam, let's take your points one by one.

First of all, I'll assume you have never experienced U.S. schools. The spelling is "judgment." What schools did you go to where they spelled it "judgement?"

The parents learn quickly that teachers in the public schools locally are not actually teaching what is required. That is the reason there are so many tutoring businesses in Pleasanton. If the parents were so clueless, then the city would not be filled with tutoring businesses filling at least one, and sometimes two or three tenant spaces, in the local shopping centers and office complexes.

Also, these so-called unionized "educational professionals" that you speak of is a misnomer. I consider educational professionals to be university and college professors, not someone who is a public school teacher.

Ultimately, it is the university and college professors who are receiving these ill-prepared students at the higher education level and are being forced to dumb down their courses for students that are not prepared for university level coursework. It is no wonder that U.S. companies are choosing to recruit foreign educated students over U.S. students for top jobs.

The top schools in the nation can be selective like the Ivy League. Most of the Ivy League students accepted are from the Northeast region where the public schools are much better, such as Massachusetts, the #1 ranked state. Many of the best private schools are in the Northeast as well.

Ultimately, the best public schools are in places where the top ranked universities are located and where the private schools provide competition for students.

In California, thankfully there are a number of private schools opening that can turn things around. I think this will be a positive outcome for all students.

@Voucher fan: "First of all, I'll assume you have never experienced U.S. schools. The spelling is "judgment." "

Actually, the word can be spelled either way. If you wanted to play Grammar Nazi, you really should have checked to be sure that I was spelling the word incorrectly.

As for your claim that you would address my points, actually you never did address my point (and, BTW, there was only one main point). You just rambled on with your own train of thought.

Judgement is the British spelling. Judgment is the U.S. spelling.

Parents are best able to analyze their children's learning style, their learning strengths and weaknesses, and what educational setting makes sense for their children. Given the choice of private schools or public schools, you can guess they will gravitate to the private schools.

That is the point of Tim Hunt's blog posting after all and why the teacher's union is have a fit.

The last person to do this is a unionized teacher who has trouble remembering each student's name. Remember, students are a commodity to them and a means to an end (more kids mean more pay...more attendance dollars means higher salaries, etc.)

Children are not commodities to their parents. Parents want what is best for their children.

The front page of the Independent states PUSD probably will have a $1.5 million shortfall in its budget - - - after they just spent $7 million in legal fees and settlements in the last three years, including just handing nearly $300,000 to a superintendent they fired without cause.

The reason is that the State is saying the pension funds for CSEA union pensions aren't doing as well in the Stock Market as they expected and PERS and the State Teachers Retirement Rates are going up. Jamie Hintzke is quoted as saying the community must fund raise and have a "educational campaign" so the community at large can donate money to fund union pensions. If you don't believe me, check out the article "Fixing State Budget Errors Could Bring School Layoff Notices" by Ron McNicoll.

The bottom line is that in a country that spends more per pupil than any other but whose student performance ranks in the bottom third among developed nations, is pathetic. It isn't failing its children for lack of resources, but the reason is that the unions and their gold-plated retirement programs have ruined education.

The lack of trained, motivated, accountable talent at the front of the class, and the School Boards that at the local level that fail to hold teachers and administrators accountable have destroyed U.S. schools.

As for Hintzke going out and stating private citizens and corporations will fund raise to fund the union pensions, that is absolutely comical.

I don't especially care for Ms. DeVos but I must admit that I appreciate that SERIOUS CASH MONEY is made available for artist worldwide by the DeVos family fund.

The foundation is online and the 2017 International ArtCompetition is about to open up!!!

I strongly encourage all artists to compete, have your voice heard and appreciated. VIVA ARTISTS! GORA!

Voucher fan,

Interesting that you state "these so-called unionized "educational professionals" that you speak of is a misnomer," yet you have no idea what you are talking about.

You love MA schools, so lets be like them. Let's cut our student to teacher ratio by 45% to 13.7 to 1 and hire 190,000 more teachers. Next we'll need to come up with $12.9 billion annually.

ZERO tax dollars to ANY religious school.

@Brit :" Given the choice of private schools or public schools, you can guess they will gravitate to the private schools.
That is the point of Tim Hunt's blog posting after all and why the teacher's union is have a fit. The last person to do this is a unionized teacher who has trouble remembering each student's name. Remember, students are a commodity to them and a means to an end (more kids mean more pay...more attendance dollars means higher salaries, etc.)"

Will all those parents gravitate to private schools? You seem to be assuming that that is a given, but I don't think that that is necessarily true. I'm quite happy with both the teaching and the school atmosphere at the Pleasanton elementary school that my kids are attending. As for making a blanket statement condemning en masse all public school teachers everywhere like "Remember, students are a commodity to them and a means to an end...", that's too stupid of a statement to even bother commenting on further.

If there is any one thing that would free us from both tenure and unions...I'll campaign to free us of both. Let us start putting kids first.
States and countries that are free of either excel, That we allow
both shows the power of their dictatorship. We wouldn't allow that for ourselves, so why do we allow our children's future to be under that control, totally without logic.