| Topic: |
Sociology > Education |
| User: |
"" |
| Date: |
08 Nov 2007 03:42:01 AM |
| Object: |
Consistant voter rejection of vouchers |
Regardless of the political leanings of a states voters, when voters are
allowed to vote on the issue of vouchers the resutls have been the same.
CURRENT STAUS OF VOUCHER SYSTEMS
:
Voters have rejected ballot initiatives to create voucher systems
STATE PAROCHIAID REFERENDA
STATE YEAR- AGAINST- FOR
New York 1967 72% 28%
Michigan 1970 57% 43%
Nebraska 1970 57% 43%
Oregon 1972 61% 39%
Idaho 1972 57% 43%
Maryland 1972 55% 45%
Maryland 1974 57% 43%
Washington 1975 61% 39%
Missouri 1976 60% 40%
Alaska 1976 54% 46%
Michigan 1978 74% 26%
D C 1981 89% 11%
California 1982 61% 39%
Massachusetts 1982 62% 38%
South Dakota 1986 46% 54%*
Massachusetts 1986 70% 30%
Utah 1988 70% 30%
Oregon 1990 67% 33%
Colorado 1992 67% 33%
California 1993 70% 30%
California 2000 71% 29%
Michigan 2000 69% 31%
Utah 2007 62% 38%
--------------------------------------------------------
* The S Dakota vote was for a bill for funds to purchase books only for
k-12 private religious schools. (Something already found to be
constitutional nationally)
VOTERS IN CALIFORNIA, MICHIGAN OVERWHELMINGLY
REJECT SCHOOL VOUCHERS
http://www.au.org/press/pr118002.htm
The above only mentions Colorado once but do notice the size of the defeat.
Representatives elected to the state legislatures and Congress are suppose
to represent the citizens of their districts.
These defeats at the ballot box, with regards to vouchers, have not been
squeaker ya know 51% to 49%, or 50.5% to 49,5%
Florida, Maine, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Vermont, and Wisconsin have all
passed voucher laws. All have been found unconstitutional by the courts,
with the exception of:
Wisconsin's law, which, according to the People For the American Way
Foundation (PFAWF) is currently "under investigation by the state because
of a complaint filed by PFAWF and the NAACP." 1
***************************************************************
You are invited to check out the following:
The Rise of the Theocratic States of America
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/theocracy.htm
American Theocrats - Past and Present
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/theocrats.htm
The Constitutional Principle: Separation of Church and State
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html
[and to join the discussion group for the above site and/or Separation of
Church and State in general, listed below]
HRSepCnS · Historical Reality SepChurch&State
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HRSepCnS/
***************************************************************
.. . . You can't understand a phrase such as "Congress shall make no law
respecting an establishment of religion" by syllogistic reasoning. Words
take their meaning from social as well as textual contexts, which is why "a
page of history is worth a volume of logic." New York Trust Co. v. Eisner,
256 U.S. 345, 349, 41 S.Ct. 506, 507, 65 L.Ed. 963 (1921) (Holmes, J.).
Sherman v. Community Consol. Dist. 21, 980 F.2d 437, 445 (7th Cir. 1992)
.. . .
****************************************************************
USAF LT. COL (Ret) Buffman (Glen P. Goffin) wrote
"You pilot always into an unknown future;
facts are your only clue. Get the facts!"
That philosophy 'snipit' helped to get me, and my crew, through a good
many combat missions and far too many scary, inflight, emergencies.
It has also played a significant role in helping me to expose the
plethora of radical Christian propaganda and lies that we find at
almost every media turn.
*****************************************************************
THE CONSTITUTIONAL PRINCIPLE:
SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html
****************************************************************
.
|
|
| User: "JTEM" |
|
| Title: Re: Consistant voter rejection of vouchers |
08 Nov 2007 04:33:03 AM |
|
|
(excessive crosspostings trimmed)
wrote:
VOTERS IN CALIFORNIA, MICHIGAN OVERWHELMINGLY
REJECT SCHOOL VOUCHERS
http://www.au.org/press/pr118002.htm
Good. Of all the stupid ideas supported by the Reich, this
one is so clearly aimed at the pockets of the rich that you'd
have to be in a coma to not see it.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Herman Rubin" |
|
| Title: Re: Consistant voter rejection of vouchers |
08 Nov 2007 11:27:10 AM |
|
|
In article <1194517983.128560.37070@t8g2000prg.googlegroups.com>,
JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
(excessive crosspostings trimmed)
buckeye-...@nospam.net wrote:
VOTERS IN CALIFORNIA, MICHIGAN OVERWHELMINGLY
REJECT SCHOOL VOUCHERS
http://www.au.org/press/pr118002.htm
Good. Of all the stupid ideas supported by the Reich, this
one is so clearly aimed at the pockets of the rich that you'd
have to be in a coma to not see it.
Do you want schools in which children can learn
according to their abilities, taught by those who
understand their subjects, or do you want children
to be with their age group, and taught by those who
supposedly know how to teach, but do not understand?
The second is what the public schools are offering.
--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
hrubin@stat.purdue.edu Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558
.
|
|
|
| User: "JTEM" |
|
| Title: Re: Consistant voter rejection of vouchers |
08 Nov 2007 02:57:13 PM |
|
|
(Herman Rubin) wrote:
Do you want schools in which children can learn
according to their abilities, taught by those who
understand their subjects, or do you want children
to be with their age group, and taught by those who
supposedly know how to teach, but do not understand?
The second is what the public schools are offering.
Two things:
#1. Your characterizations are hardly accurate, never
mind fair.
#2. You're pretending what exists now, under the current
system, will also exist after you destroy the current
system. Where government money goes government
mandates will soon follow.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Larry Hewitt" |
|
| Title: Re: Consistant voter rejection of vouchers |
08 Nov 2007 07:42:03 PM |
|
|
"Herman Rubin" <hrubin@odds.stat.purdue.edu> wrote in message
news:fgvgte$17os@odds.stat.purdue.edu...
In article <1194517983.128560.37070@t8g2000prg.googlegroups.com>,
JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
(excessive crosspostings trimmed)
buckeye-...@nospam.net wrote:
VOTERS IN CALIFORNIA, MICHIGAN OVERWHELMINGLY
REJECT SCHOOL VOUCHERS
http://www.au.org/press/pr118002.htm
Good. Of all the stupid ideas supported by the Reich, this
one is so clearly aimed at the pockets of the rich that you'd
have to be in a coma to not see it.
Do you want schools in which children can learn
according to their abilities, taught by those who
understand their subjects, or do you want children
to be with their age group, and taught by those who
supposedly know how to teach, but do not understand?
The second is what the public schools are offering.
Well, this is wrong, but I'll ignore it dfor now.
Vouchers are NOT a solution.
Voucher do not create more schools.
In Utah for ex, more than holf the counties didnot have a private school. A
look at voter demographics shows the initiative failed overwhelmingly in the
conservative rural areas because voters recognized this liitation.
The same is true in many other states that have had voucher initaitives
fail.
Even where private schools are in place, the number of seats available is
small compared to the size of the school age population.
And in the end, there is no certaintly that a private school will be better
than a public school.
When adjusted for demographics (poverty, handicaps, etc) public school
outperform non-religous private schools by 5 points onthe NEAP test, and
religious private schools by 7 points.
That said, there is much variation in any kind of school, and there are
excelllent and horrific schools of all types.
LArry
--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
hrubin@stat.purdue.edu Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bob LeChevalier" |
|
| Title: Re: Consistant voter rejection of vouchers |
08 Nov 2007 10:02:09 PM |
|
|
"Larry Hewitt" <larryhewi@comporium.net> wrote:
"Herman Rubin" <hrubin@odds.stat.purdue.edu> wrote in message
news:fgvgte$17os@odds.stat.purdue.edu...
In article <1194517983.128560.37070@t8g2000prg.googlegroups.com>,
JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
(excessive crosspostings trimmed)
buckeye-...@nospam.net wrote:
VOTERS IN CALIFORNIA, MICHIGAN OVERWHELMINGLY
REJECT SCHOOL VOUCHERS
http://www.au.org/press/pr118002.htm
Good. Of all the stupid ideas supported by the Reich, this
one is so clearly aimed at the pockets of the rich that you'd
have to be in a coma to not see it.
Do you want schools in which children can learn
according to their abilities, taught by those who
understand their subjects, or do you want children
to be with their age group, and taught by those who
supposedly know how to teach, but do not understand?
The second is what the public schools are offering.
Well, this is wrong, but I'll ignore it dfor now.
Vouchers are NOT a solution.
Voucher do not create more schools.
In Utah for ex, more than holf the counties didnot have a private school. A
look at voter demographics shows the initiative failed overwhelmingly in the
conservative rural areas because voters recognized this liitation.
The same is true in many other states that have had voucher initaitives
fail.
Even where private schools are in place, the number of seats available is
small compared to the size of the school age population.
And in the end, there is no certaintly that a private school will be better
than a public school.
When adjusted for demographics (poverty, handicaps, etc) public school
outperform non-religous private schools by 5 points onthe NEAP test, and
religious private schools by 7 points.
That said, there is much variation in any kind of school, and there are
excelllent and horrific schools of all types.
The other alternative is charter schools. DC has a robust charter
school movement. Most of the charter schools perform as bad as the DC
schools on standardized tests. Meanwhile, the charter schools haven't
hurt the public schools in the least, but have destroyed the local
Catholic school system - as I understand it, the archdiocese has
indicated that it plans to drop the religious aspect of the Catholic
schools, set up a religion-neutral governance board and convert most
of them to charter schools, and shut down the rest.
lojbab
.
|
|
|
| User: "Larry Hewitt" |
|
| Title: Re: Consistant voter rejection of vouchers |
09 Nov 2007 03:43:14 PM |
|
|
"Bob LeChevalier" <lojbab@lojban.org> wrote in message
news:2lm7j3pi8e62rf1dnu5uoejkp3bisfctg7@4ax.com...
"Larry Hewitt" <larryhewi@comporium.net> wrote:
"Herman Rubin" <hrubin@odds.stat.purdue.edu> wrote in message
news:fgvgte$17os@odds.stat.purdue.edu...
In article <1194517983.128560.37070@t8g2000prg.googlegroups.com>,
JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
(excessive crosspostings trimmed)
buckeye-...@nospam.net wrote:
VOTERS IN CALIFORNIA, MICHIGAN OVERWHELMINGLY
REJECT SCHOOL VOUCHERS
http://www.au.org/press/pr118002.htm
Good. Of all the stupid ideas supported by the Reich, this
one is so clearly aimed at the pockets of the rich that you'd
have to be in a coma to not see it.
Do you want schools in which children can learn
according to their abilities, taught by those who
understand their subjects, or do you want children
to be with their age group, and taught by those who
supposedly know how to teach, but do not understand?
The second is what the public schools are offering.
Well, this is wrong, but I'll ignore it dfor now.
Vouchers are NOT a solution.
Voucher do not create more schools.
In Utah for ex, more than holf the counties didnot have a private school.
A
look at voter demographics shows the initiative failed overwhelmingly in
the
conservative rural areas because voters recognized this liitation.
The same is true in many other states that have had voucher initaitives
fail.
Even where private schools are in place, the number of seats available is
small compared to the size of the school age population.
And in the end, there is no certaintly that a private school will be
better
than a public school.
When adjusted for demographics (poverty, handicaps, etc) public school
outperform non-religous private schools by 5 points onthe NEAP test, and
religious private schools by 7 points.
That said, there is much variation in any kind of school, and there are
excelllent and horrific schools of all types.
The other alternative is charter schools. DC has a robust charter
school movement. Most of the charter schools perform as bad as the DC
schools on standardized tests. Meanwhile, the charter schools haven't
hurt the public schools in the least, but have destroyed the local
Catholic school system - as I understand it, the archdiocese has
indicated that it plans to drop the religious aspect of the Catholic
schools, set up a religion-neutral governance board and convert most
of them to charter schools, and shut down the rest.
lojbab
North Carolina also has a robust charter school movement ( strangely, South
Carolina, where the legislature tries annually to implement a voucher
system, does not).
A review published in the last month or two show the NC charter school
system, on average, underperformed the public school system, too.
Larry
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "* US *" |
|
| Title: Re: Consistant voter rejection of vouchers |
09 Nov 2007 05:10:29 AM |
|
|
On 8 Nov 2007 12:27:10 -0500, (Herman Rubin) wrote:
Do you want schools in which children can learn
according to their abilities, taught by those who
understand their subjects ...
You don't need vouchers for that. In fact, the
vouchers exclude children who deserve better.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jake R" |
|
| Title: Re: Consistant voter rejection of vouchers |
09 Nov 2007 12:58:30 PM |
|
|
As a resident of Utah, this whole debate about education vouchers has
left me feeling a little jaded about how education policy is handled
in this country. I believe that education is the solution to a lot of
our country's problems. If you want to solve problems like crime,
poverty, unemployment, drug and alcohol abuse, etc. education is the
answer. I agree with the character Sam Seaborn from NBC's The West
Wing:
Sam Seaborn: "Education is the silver bullet. Education is everything.
We don't need little changes. We need gigantic revolutionary changes.
Schools should be palaces. Competition for the best teachers should be
fierce. They should be getting six-figure salaries. Schools should be
incredibly expensive for government and absolutely free of charge for
its citizens, just like national defense. That is my position. I just
haven't figured out how to do it yet."
As a country, we always give lip service to education, saying it is
one of our biggest priorities but our actions are speaking louder than
our words. What is frustrating to me is that we can all agree that our
education system needs to be better but we spend more time lambasting
the other political side than we do actually searching for meaningful
solutions.
Specifically on vouchers, I admit that I voted for them. I was torn
even up until the moment I walked up to the voting machine. I can see
arguments on both sides and I can see special interest groups'
influence on both sides as well. The small little economist voice in
my head likes the incentives that a voucher system would build in, but
I don't like the possibility of the rich getting richer and the poor
getting poorer. In the end, I voted for it simply because it would be
a change in the status quo that clearly isn't working.
The facts were murky at best and both sides took advantage of
emotionally loaded rhetoric to try to get out the vote on their own
side. Phrases like "Liberal East Coast Unions" are meant to draw a
very specific picture in your mind, but I didn't hear much about the
school kids that would be affected. If we took the millions of dollars
spent on advertisements in the state of Utah, we could have funded 5
or 6 entire school districts in the state for an entire year. That's
just ridiculous to me.
I guess my point is this: we spend so much time attacking individuals
and labeling people while the whole time avoiding the real issue. I am
a realist in that I recognize that this is how all political issues
are handled in our system. But I'm also an idealist in the sense that
I truly believe that we as a country could put our minds together and
come up with a viable solution for education. If there's one issue
that should be politics as usual, it's this one. So my question for
everyone is, what can we do to fix education in this country?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Herman Rubin" |
|
| Title: Re: Consistant voter rejection of vouchers |
14 Nov 2007 03:16:18 PM |
|
|
In article <1194634710.323015.219980@e34g2000pro.googlegroups.com>,
Jake R <Jacob.Roskelley@gmail.com> wrote:
..................
I guess my point is this: we spend so much time attacking individuals
and labeling people while the whole time avoiding the real issue. I am
a realist in that I recognize that this is how all political issues
are handled in our system. But I'm also an idealist in the sense that
I truly believe that we as a country could put our minds together and
come up with a viable solution for education. If there's one issue
that should be politics as usual, it's this one. So my question for
everyone is, what can we do to fix education in this country?
We cannot "fix" education; this assumes that we know what
is wrong, and can agree on what is wrong and what to do
about it. We cannot even agree on the goals.
In such a situation, all we can do is to provide the
information, and not force attitudes by "majority rule".
Some people do not care what the quality of education
is for their children; they just want them to get the
credentials. Or they want the social and athletic
features of the schools for their children.
Others want their children to get a good "moral education";
here we are on VERY dangerous ground. There is NOW much
"moral education" by teachers who have their moral views,
which happen to disagree with mine, and with that of quite
a few of my colleagues.
Some want their children to learn subject matter as fast
and as well as they can. Right now, these have nowhere
to turn. The present teachers cannot teach children what
those who know the subject matter can get across to those
in elementary school. The original "new math" was an
example of that; it was well tested in quite a few schools,
on tens of thousands of children, and WORKED. Put in the
public schools, it was a disaster.
By the way, the scholars cannot agree on how; the approaches
have to be tried out.
As a country, we CANNOT "put our minds together", as we
have no idea how to go about it. At best, we can try to
make the necessary variety of approaches, and recognize
that what works for one will not work for another. One
size does not fit all.
We can use technology to get around the idea that the best
way to teach children is to put them in a classroom chosen
by administrative rules. That has never been an optimal
solution from the standpoint of quality, but was forced by
practicality.
So at the present time, my answer has to be considerable
chaos. The present teachers, under the present approaches,
can only continue the damage.
--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
hrubin@stat.purdue.edu Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bob LeChevalier" |
|
| Title: Re: Consistant voter rejection of vouchers |
09 Nov 2007 02:48:26 PM |
|
|
Jake R <Jacob.Roskelley@gmail.com> wrote:
I guess my point is this: we spend so much time attacking individuals
and labeling people while the whole time avoiding the real issue. I am
a realist in that I recognize that this is how all political issues
are handled in our system. But I'm also an idealist in the sense that
I truly believe that we as a country could put our minds together and
come up with a viable solution for education. If there's one issue
that should be politics as usual, it's this one. So my question for
everyone is, what can we do to fix education in this country?
Well the first and hardest thing we have to do is agree upon as to
what the goals for "education" are in this country. You can't solve
"the problem" when you aren't agreed as to what "the problem" is. I
have a feeling that if we did manage to agree, that for that area that
we agreed upon, we would find that the existing education system does
an excellent job. It is in the areas that we disagree on, that we
have a problem.
Another thing to remember is that living in Utah, you actually have
one of the lowest cost education systems in the country. The Mormon
family stability and non-governmental social services tend to reduce
the amount of services provided by the government to families,
services that are usually provided through the schools because it is
efficient to do so. Utah doesn't have nearly the extreme diversity of
California where there are districts where more than half the kids
speak a different language at home, or here in northern Virginia,
where we have excellent schools despite having some individual schools
with no less than 60 different languages spoken at home - but we also
pay 2-3 times the per student cost that Utah pays.
http://nces.ed.gov/ccd/pubs/npefs03/table_5.asp?popup=1
has the numbers for 2002 for example, and our county was spending
around $10,000 per student that year. (And it takes spending that
much year after year to achieve excellence - it can't happen in a year
or two).
Note that DC, noted for its extremely high per-student costs, is
actually spending almost half that money on support services, things
that in other states are handled by an extra layer of government that
doesn't exist in the city without a state, and which therefore don't
appear in the school budget because they aren't really for education.
I say this as a warning about reading too much into per-student costs.
But giving Utah teachers 6 figure salaries would mean that a ratio of
20 kids per teacher (which is a little worse than average) is going to
cost $5000 per student for the teacher's salary alone, without
benefits, schoolbooks, facilies and equipment or any sort of support
services or administration. Classroom teachers tend to be only around
1/2 the staff at a typical public school around here.
Private schools can't really do the job cheaper. The Catholics have
remained competitive largely by subsidizing their schools, so that
tuition doesn't reflect the full cost, and by not providing all the
services of a public school. Non-religious private schools of the
sort that are noted for their excellence around here have tuitions
upwards of $20,000 per year and an endowment fund on top of that.
lojbab
.
|
|
|
| User: "Kate " |
|
| Title: Re: Consistant voter rejection of vouchers |
09 Nov 2007 09:27:01 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 15:48:26 -0500, Bob LeChevalier
<lojbab@lojban.org> wrote:
Jake R <Jacob.Roskelley@gmail.com> wrote:
I guess my point is this: we spend so much time attacking individuals
and labeling people while the whole time avoiding the real issue. I am
a realist in that I recognize that this is how all political issues
are handled in our system. But I'm also an idealist in the sense that
I truly believe that we as a country could put our minds together and
come up with a viable solution for education. If there's one issue
that should be politics as usual, it's this one. So my question for
everyone is, what can we do to fix education in this country?
Well the first and hardest thing we have to do is agree upon as to
what the goals for "education" are in this country. You can't solve
"the problem" when you aren't agreed as to what "the problem" is. I
have a feeling that if we did manage to agree, that for that area that
we agreed upon, we would find that the existing education system does
an excellent job. It is in the areas that we disagree on, that we
have a problem.
Another thing to remember is that living in Utah, you actually have
one of the lowest cost education systems in the country. The Mormon
family stability and non-governmental social services tend to reduce
the amount of services provided by the government to families,
services that are usually provided through the schools because it is
efficient to do so. Utah doesn't have nearly the extreme diversity of
California where there are districts where more than half the kids
speak a different language at home, or here in northern Virginia,
where we have excellent schools despite having some individual schools
with no less than 60 different languages spoken at home - but we also
pay 2-3 times the per student cost that Utah pays.
http://nces.ed.gov/ccd/pubs/npefs03/table_5.asp?popup=1
has the numbers for 2002 for example, and our county was spending
around $10,000 per student that year. (And it takes spending that
much year after year to achieve excellence - it can't happen in a year
or two).
Note that DC, noted for its extremely high per-student costs, is
actually spending almost half that money on support services, things
that in other states are handled by an extra layer of government that
doesn't exist in the city without a state, and which therefore don't
appear in the school budget because they aren't really for education.
I say this as a warning about reading too much into per-student costs.
But giving Utah teachers 6 figure salaries would mean that a ratio of
20 kids per teacher (which is a little worse than average) is going to
cost $5000 per student for the teacher's salary alone, without
benefits, schoolbooks, facilies and equipment or any sort of support
services or administration. Classroom teachers tend to be only around
1/2 the staff at a typical public school around here.
Private schools can't really do the job cheaper. The Catholics have
remained competitive largely by subsidizing their schools, so that
tuition doesn't reflect the full cost, and by not providing all the
services of a public school. Non-religious private schools of the
sort that are noted for their excellence around here have tuitions
upwards of $20,000 per year and an endowment fund on top of that.
lojbab
My experience with private schools, is they don't do a better job.
Nobody is really looking over their shoulder and they just pull crap.
As a paying parent, you have no recourse. Walk away from the payments
you put in and make your kid repeat the year at a public school where
they give a damn that the kid knows how to read and do math and the
teachers aren't paid almost nothing.
No nurses, no school psychologists, no reading specialists, just lots
of field trips and class parties.
Private school teachers wish they could get public school jobs, so you
get the bottom of the barrel - teachers that don't know how to teach,
teachers that are wierd, teachers that don't show up but half the time
so the kids are constantly being taught by substitutes.
In public school you only get a few of those kind of teachers, not the
vast majority.
I was amazed. I'd always heard private schools were better. I found
out otherwise. You ever look, you will find out there are almost no
private high schools - plenty of k thru 6, but not when the kids are
challenging and the teachers actually have to know their stuff and not
'slide'.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Pubkeybreaker" |
|
| Title: Re: Consistant voter rejection of vouchers |
13 Nov 2007 09:28:01 AM |
|
|
Jake R wrote:
As a resident of Utah, this whole debate about education vouchers has
left me feeling a little jaded about how education policy is handled
in this country. I believe that education is the solution to a lot of
our country's problems. If you want to solve problems like crime,
poverty, unemployment, drug and alcohol abuse, etc. education is the
answer.
Yes and No. Education will indeed solve most of the problem. But
lack of education has a more basic (and perhaps biological) cause.
The people who cause crime, have high unemployment, take
drugs etc. are for the most part precisely those people who DO NOT
VALUE education. They don't care about it. Even if we had a first
rate
education system, it would not solve the problem of those who do not
care whether they become educated. We can't force people to educate
themselves. [actually I think we could, but the solution(s) would be
draconian
unrealistic, and violate equal protection guarantees of the
Constitution among
other things].
The simple fact is that we will always have half of society
possessing
below average intelligence. And about 15% will be more than 1 standard
deviation
below. (I don't want a debate about I.Q., race etc.; I am not
arguing the merits
of any particular way of measuring intelligence and I agree that a
single number such
as IQ does not properly capture it). Such people do not have the
ability or motivation to educate themselves. We will always have such
people.
As we are slowly doing with cigarette smoking, we have to make it
CULTURALLY
UNACCEPTABLE to be uneducated.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Herman Rubin" |
|
| Title: Re: Consistant voter rejection of vouchers |
09 Nov 2007 09:06:05 PM |
|
|
In article <20g8j39lld4tf73j8abmp5doop0kj15o7c@4ax.com>,
<America@USA.now> wrote:
On 8 Nov 2007 12:27:10 -0500, (Herman Rubin) wrote:
Do you want schools in which children can learn
according to their abilities, taught by those who
understand their subjects ...
You don't need vouchers for that. In fact, the
vouchers exclude children who deserve better.
How many schools do we have which do not group by
age, and allow (and preferably) encourage children
to go at their pace?
How many schools have teachers who can teach concepts,
and do anything but memorization and rote?
How many have history teachers who know anything about
ancient history, mathematics teachers who know any
mathematics except how to calculate, physics teachers
who know what is going on in modern physics, and the
same for chemistry and biology?
The answer is few, and it is getting fewer. The
teachers are trained in classroom management, etc.,
and know little of subject matter. One of the
posters on the mathematics newsgroup questioned
whether the education courses required a lobotomy.
Academic schools essentially do not exist, except
possibly a few excuses for them at the middle or
high school levels. Those who should be going to
good colleges can do college material in their
subjects by their early teens, at the latest.
--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
hrubin@stat.purdue.edu Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Consistant voter rejection of vouchers |
10 Nov 2007 09:16:59 AM |
|
|
On 9 Nov 2007 22:06:05 -0500, (Herman
Rubin) wrote:
How many schools do we have which do not group by
age, and allow (and preferably) encourage children
to go at their pace?
An arbitrary "requirement" based on your own philosophy, but within
limits, I would support grouping by ability rather than strictly by
age.
How many schools have teachers who can teach concepts,
and do anything but memorization and rote?
Most of those in NY, with the possible exception of a handful in the
largest cities which are unable to draw qualified people.
How many have history teachers who know anything about
ancient history, mathematics teachers who know any
mathematics except how to calculate, physics teachers
who know what is going on in modern physics, and the
same for chemistry and biology?
As above.
The answer is few, and it is getting fewer.
It's always nice to be able to both pose the question and then
unilaterally decide what the answer is. Saves time actually
investigating or thinking.
The teachers are trained in classroom management,
Yes, absolutely essential in these days of "student rights".
and know little of subject matter.
Based, no doubt, on your long years of observation of said teachers
from your lofty perch at Purdue. One would think that an educated
person such as yourself would be wary of drawing conclusions based on
indirect "evidence". Whatever the failings of students entering your
classroom, there is absoolutely no real evidence for your claim (but
I'm sure there are issues in some states/areas). "Students" cannot be
coerced to learn, save, possibly, by their parents. Teachers can only
accomplish that with which students will cooperate. You like to blame
the non-learning (to your standards) of your students, but that same
criticism may be leveled by any, and all, of the teachers who came
before you, and, ultimately, on the parents who failed to inculcate a
love of, and respect for, learning. The fact of the matter is, that
EVERY teacher, including you, can only do what is possible regardless
of their individual qualifications.
One of the
posters on the mathematics newsgroup questioned
whether the education courses required a lobotomy.
Those, like yourself, who wish that all elementary teachers were, in
fact, experts at every field - mathematicians, for example, are the
same people who would not, themselves, deign to do the job. They
would almost certainly consider this "beneath them", as you do. Thus
the expectation that someone like themselves should do what they are
not willing to do is both irrational and idiotic. Very few elementary
teachers will be proficient in math and science. It will ALWAYS be
that way. You start to see a REASONABLE level of expertise in grades
8-12, but NEVER will you see a uniform level of expertise equal to a
college doctorate. Fortunately, this allows you and your cronies to
feel superior to those who attempt to do a job that you "experts" are
unwilling (and frankly, ill-qualified) to perform. The admonition to
withhold criticism until you walk in another's shoes comes to mind
here. Climb down off your perch and get your hands dirty.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Kate " |
|
| Title: Re: Consistant voter rejection of vouchers |
09 Nov 2007 09:37:01 PM |
|
|
On 9 Nov 2007 22:06:05 -0500, (Herman
Rubin) wrote:
In article <20g8j39lld4tf73j8abmp5doop0kj15o7c@4ax.com>,
<America@USA.now> wrote:
On 8 Nov 2007 12:27:10 -0500, (Herman Rubin) wrote:
Do you want schools in which children can learn
according to their abilities, taught by those who
understand their subjects ...
You don't need vouchers for that. In fact, the
vouchers exclude children who deserve better.
How many schools do we have which do not group by
age, and allow (and preferably) encourage children
to go at their pace?
How many schools have teachers who can teach concepts,
and do anything but memorization and rote?
How many have history teachers who know anything about
ancient history, mathematics teachers who know any
mathematics except how to calculate, physics teachers
who know what is going on in modern physics, and the
same for chemistry and biology?
The answer is few, and it is getting fewer. The
teachers are trained in classroom management, etc.,
and know little of subject matter. One of the
posters on the mathematics newsgroup questioned
whether the education courses required a lobotomy.
Academic schools essentially do not exist, except
possibly a few excuses for them at the middle or
high school levels. Those who should be going to
good colleges can do college material in their
subjects by their early teens, at the latest.
LOL, and you think the very very few private schools that actually do
this will be adequate for all of the millions of American children?
Face it. Private schools don't do a better job of teaching than
public schools. All they do is baby sit little kids in sanitized
groups for wealthy urbanites.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Herman Rubin" |
|
| Title: Re: Consistant voter rejection of vouchers |
12 Nov 2007 11:33:13 AM |
|
|
In article <474925b4.923686859@news-west.newscene.com>,
Kate <cobalt@newscene.com> wrote:
On 9 Nov 2007 22:06:05 -0500, (Herman
Rubin) wrote:
In article <20g8j39lld4tf73j8abmp5doop0kj15o7c@4ax.com>,
<America@USA.now> wrote:
On 8 Nov 2007 12:27:10 -0500, (Herman Rubin) wrote:
Do you want schools in which children can learn
according to their abilities, taught by those who
understand their subjects ...
You don't need vouchers for that. In fact, the
vouchers exclude children who deserve better.
How many schools do we have which do not group by
age, and allow (and preferably) encourage children
to go at their pace?
How many schools have teachers who can teach concepts,
and do anything but memorization and rote?
How many have history teachers who know anything about
ancient history, mathematics teachers who know any
mathematics except how to calculate, physics teachers
who know what is going on in modern physics, and the
same for chemistry and biology?
The answer is few, and it is getting fewer. The
teachers are trained in classroom management, etc.,
and know little of subject matter. One of the
posters on the mathematics newsgroup questioned
whether the education courses required a lobotomy.
Academic schools essentially do not exist, except
possibly a few excuses for them at the middle or
high school levels. Those who should be going to
good colleges can do college material in their
subjects by their early teens, at the latest.
LOL, and you think the very very few private schools that actually do
this will be adequate for all of the millions of American children?
Of course not, but vouchers would make possible the
introduction of far more. It is only vouchers which
will allow the bright children of poor and middle
class parents to have any chance of an education
according to their abilities. I foresee also the
creation of electronic private schools, where the
classes will be like the present ones, but with
children grouped by ability, and with only electronic
contact between students and teachers.
The public schools do a great deal of DAMAGE in the
early years, and as they are set up, there is little
they can do about it, except possibly move them
along at their individual speeds. The cost to a
bright child of being delayed a year is greater than
the teacher's salary, and there is also the cost to
society. Teachers should be willing to say they are
not able to teach a child in a subject, and pass the
child along. A kindergarten child can be reading
well and doing high school or college mathematics.
We are not going to get reasonable schools NOW no matter
what we do. The development of decent teachers is going
to take decades, and as long as the current educationists
are deciding how the schools will be run, they can only
be bad.
Face it. Private schools don't do a better job of teaching than
public schools. All they do is baby sit little kids in sanitized
groups for wealthy urbanites.
Some of them are, and some of them are quite good.
During the Depression, you would have been completely
right. But the public schools went into decline, from
a subject orientation to a "child" orientation, with
age grouping and socialization emphasized. The weak
child does not benefit from the bright child in a class,
as it is clear that emulation is not possible. It is
the case that having someone ask good questions does
help the class, but it is still only those sufficiently
prepared and interested in learning who are helped.
The current public schools, as they are run, are hopeless.
The competition of affordable private schools MAY change
this, and it needs to be there.
--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
hrubin@stat.purdue.edu Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558
.
|
|
|
| User: "Larry Hewitt" |
|
| Title: Re: Consistant voter rejection of vouchers |
14 Nov 2007 07:41:18 AM |
|
|
"Herman Rubin" <> wrote in message
news:fha2op$2ejq@odds.stat.purdue.edu...
In article <474925b4.923686859@news-west.newscene.com>,
Kate <cobalt@newscene.com> wrote:
On 9 Nov 2007 22:06:05 -0500, (Herman
Rubin) wrote:
In article <20g8j39lld4tf73j8abmp5doop0kj15o7c@4ax.com>,
<America@USA.now> wrote:
On 8 Nov 2007 12:27:10 -0500, (Herman Rubin)
wrote:
Do you want schools in which children can learn
according to their abilities, taught by those who
understand their subjects ...
You don't need vouchers for that. In fact, the
vouchers exclude children who deserve better.
How many schools do we have which do not group by
age, and allow (and preferably) encourage children
to go at their pace?
How many schools have teachers who can teach concepts,
and do anything but memorization and rote?
How many have history teachers who know anything about
ancient history, mathematics teachers who know any
mathematics except how to calculate, physics teachers
who know what is going on in modern physics, and the
same for chemistry and biology?
The answer is few, and it is getting fewer. The
teachers are trained in classroom management, etc.,
and know little of subject matter. One of the
posters on the mathematics newsgroup questioned
whether the education courses required a lobotomy.
Academic schools essentially do not exist, except
possibly a few excuses for them at the middle or
high school levels. Those who should be going to
good colleges can do college material in their
subjects by their early teens, at the latest.
LOL, and you think the very very few private schools that actually do
this will be adequate for all of the millions of American children?
Of course not, but vouchers would make possible the
introduction of far more. It is only vouchers which
will allow the bright children of poor and middle
class parents to have any chance of an education
according to their abilities. I foresee also the
creation of electronic private schools, where the
classes will be like the present ones, but with
children grouped by ability, and with only electronic
contact between students and teachers.
To date no voucher program has increased the number of private school seats
available, and there is no indication that any future program will do so.
The economics of private schools mitigte against any expansion --- the
startup costs are prohibitively high and the required tuition to return that
investment is too high.
Most private schools in existence today received assistance from churches or
other charitable/social instituions at startup --- facilities, staff,
negotitation of the legal.regulatory process, etc.
All of which begs the question --- are proivate schools superior to public
schools.
And the answer is a resounding NO!
Repeated studies at national and state levels show that, while some private
schools, especially academies, are excellent, on average private scools,
especially wreligious based schools, underperform public schools, on
average.
Federal DOE studies of NEAP tests have public schools outperforming private
schools by as much as 5 points.
A recent study of North Carolina schools again rated private schools, on
average, at below public schools at student performance on the State's
standard assessment exams.
While they noted great variation in all types of schools, with some rating
excellent, somme poor/failing, and the vast majority average, private
schools and charter schools had a larger percentage of schools rated
underperforming
Larry
The public schools do a great deal of DAMAGE in the
early years, and as they are set up, there is little
they can do about it, except possibly move them
along at their individual speeds. The cost to a
bright child of being delayed a year is greater than
the teacher's salary, and there is also the cost to
society. Teachers should be willing to say they are
not able to teach a child in a subject, and pass the
child along. A kindergarten child can be reading
well and doing high school or college mathematics.
We are not going to get reasonable schools NOW no matter
what we do. The development of decent teachers is going
to take decades, and as long as the current educationists
are deciding how the schools will be run, they can only
be bad.
Face it. Private schools don't do a better job of teaching than
public schools. All they do is baby sit little kids in sanitized
groups for wealthy urbanites.
Some of them are, and some of them are quite good.
During the Depression, you would have been completely
right. But the public schools went into decline, from
a subject orientation to a "child" orientation, with
age grouping and socialization emphasized. The weak
child does not benefit from the bright child in a class,
as it is clear that emulation is not possible. It is
the case that having someone ask good questions does
help the class, but it is still only those sufficiently
prepared and interested in learning who are helped.
The current public schools, as they are run, are hopeless.
The competition of affordable private schools MAY change
this, and it needs to be there.
--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
hrubin@stat.purdue.edu Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bob LeChevalier" |
|
| Title: Re: Consistant voter rejection of vouchers |
12 Nov 2007 10:37:47 PM |
|
|
(Herman Rubin) wrote:
LOL, and you think the very very few private schools that actually do
this will be adequate for all of the millions of American children?
Of course not, but vouchers would make possible the
introduction of far more. It is only vouchers which
will allow the bright children of poor and middle
class parents to have any chance of an education
according to their abilities. I foresee also the
creation of electronic private schools, where the
classes will be like the present ones, but with
children grouped by ability, and with only electronic
contact between students and teachers.
There have been vouchers in Cleveland and in Milwaukee for several
years now. What you think would happen has in fact NOT happened. The
private school voucher program in Milwaukee paid for 17000 kids to
attend private schools. Here is what the local newspaper said in a
lengthy feature in 2005
http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=333144
<The voucher schools feel, and look, surprisingly like schools in the
< Milwaukee Public Schools district. Both MPS and the voucher schools
< are struggling in the same battle to educate low-income, minority
< students.
....
<The choice program regenerated parochial schools in the city,
< including dozens of Catholic and Lutheran schools, which were
< experiencing declining enrollment. Overall, it has preserved the
< status quo in terms of schooling options in the city more than it has
< offered a range of new, innovative or distinctive schools.
[it says elsewhere that 70% of vouchers went to religious schools]
So much for your ideological claim that vouchers would bring about
some new kind of school.
It says that there are some excellent schools that have emerged and
about an equal number of abysmal schools that have emerged. The net
improvement is zilch, and for every kid getting an unusually good
education, another is getting an unusually bad one.
But the bottom line is that vouchers are nothing more than a parochial
school welfare program. They aren't going to improve education.
lojbab
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Kate " |
|
| Title: Re: Consistant voter rejection of vouchers |
13 Nov 2007 09:09:01 AM |
|
|
On 12 Nov 2007 12:33:13 -0500, (Herman
Rubin) wrote:
In article <474925b4.923686859@news-west.newscene.com>,
Kate <cobalt@newscene.com> wrote:
On 9 Nov 2007 22:06:05 -0500, (Herman
Rubin) wrote:
In article <20g8j39lld4tf73j8abmp5doop0kj15o7c@4ax.com>,
<America@USA.now> wrote:
On 8 Nov 2007 12:27:10 -0500, (Herman Rubin) wrote:
Do you want schools in which children can learn
according to their abilities, taught by those who
understand their subjects ...
You don't need vouchers for that. In fact, the
vouchers exclude children who deserve better.
How many schools do we have which do not group by
age, and allow (and preferably) encourage children
to go at their pace?
How many schools have teachers who can teach concepts,
and do anything but memorization and rote?
How many have history teachers who know anything about
ancient history, mathematics teachers who know any
mathematics except how to calculate, physics teachers
who know what is going on in modern physics, and the
same for chemistry and biology?
The answer is few, and it is getting fewer. The
teachers are trained in classroom management, etc.,
and know little of subject matter. One of the
posters on the mathematics newsgroup questioned
whether the education courses required a lobotomy.
Academic schools essentially do not exist, except
possibly a few excuses for them at the middle or
high school levels. Those who should be going to
good colleges can do college material in their
subjects by their early teens, at the latest.
LOL, and you think the very very few private schools that actually do
this will be adequate for all of the millions of American children?
Of course not, but vouchers would make possible the
introduction of far more. It is only vouchers which
will allow the bright children of poor and middle
class parents to have any chance of an education
according to their abilities. I foresee also the
creation of electronic private schools, where the
classes will be like the present ones, but with
children grouped by ability, and with only electronic
contact between students and teachers.
That has happened in no way so far with private schools, why do you
think it will happen with vouchers?
The public schools do a great deal of DAMAGE in the
early years, and as they are set up, there is little
they can do about it, except possibly move them
along at their individual speeds. The cost to a
bright child of being delayed a year is greater than
the teacher's salary, and there is also the cost to
society. Teachers should be willing to say they are
not able to teach a child in a subject, and pass the
child along. A kindergarten child can be reading
well and doing high school or college mathematics.
Except so far, a lot of private schools are doing far worse DAMAGE to
kids and pretending they are not, while charging an arm and a leg for
it, with no compensation.
We are not going to get reasonable schools NOW no matter
what we do. The development of decent teachers is going
to take decades, and as long as the current educationists
are deciding how the schools will be run, they can only
be bad.
Why don't you start by teaching people that education helps everyone,
not just the kids and their parents. That will do far more than a
useless voucher scheme.
Face it. Private schools don't do a better job of teaching than
public schools. All they do is baby sit little kids in sanitized
groups for wealthy urbanites.
Some of them are, and some of them are quite good.
During the Depression, you would have been completely
right. But the public schools went into decline, from
a subject orientation to a "child" orientation, with
age grouping and socialization emphasized. The weak
child does not benefit from the bright child in a class,
as it is clear that emulation is not possible. It is
the case that having someone ask good questions does
help the class, but it is still only those sufficiently
prepared and interested in learning who are helped.
The current public schools, as they are run, are hopeless.
The competition of affordable private schools MAY change
this, and it needs to be there.
I think you have little experience with public schools and private
ones.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bob LeChevalier" |
|
| Title: Re: Consistant voter rejection of vouchers |
13 Nov 2007 01:24:01 PM |
|
|
(Kate ) wrote:
LOL, and you think the very very few private schools that actually do
this will be adequate for all of the millions of American children?
Of course not, but vouchers would make possible the
introduction of far more. It is only vouchers which
will allow the bright children of poor and middle
class parents to have any chance of an education
according to their abilities. I foresee also the
creation of electronic private schools, where the
classes will be like the present ones, but with
children grouped by ability, and with only electronic
contact between students and teachers.
That has happened in no way so far with private schools, why do you
think it will happen with vouchers?
Actually, there are apparently some high quality, ability-paced
private schools in this area, but their tuition runs upwards of $20K
per year. For example:
http://www.nysmith.com/final/index.html
lojbab
.
|
|
|
| User: "Herman Rubin" |
|
| Title: Re: Consistant voter rejection of vouchers |
13 Nov 2007 07:38:39 PM |
|
|
In article <khtjj399ppvrq7pf4toa9ol0sh47750icb@4ax.com>,
Bob LeChevalier <lojbab@lojban.org> wrote:
cobalt@newscene.com (Kate ) wrote:
LOL, and you think the very very few private schools that actually do
this will be adequate for all of the millions of American children?
Of course not, but vouchers would make possible the
introduction of far more. It is only vouchers which
will allow the bright children of poor and middle
class parents to have any chance of an education
according to their abilities. I foresee also the
creation of electronic private schools, where the
classes will be like the present ones, but with
children grouped by ability, and with only electronic
contact between students and teachers.
That has happened in no way so far with private schools, why do you
think it will happen with vouchers?
Actually, there are apparently some high quality, ability-paced
private schools in this area, but their tuition runs upwards of $20K
per year. For example:
http://www.nysmith.com/final/index.html
There are some in the East, and a very small number
elsewhere. After the first year my son was in a
non-kindergarten class, with a program designed for
him by a school willing to even throw out the rule
book, the school suggested that he go to an academic
private school. One could not be found within 80
miles, and I was on the faculty of a major university.
--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
hrubin@stat.purdue.edu Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558
.
|
|
|
| User: "toto" |
|
| Title: Re: Consistant voter rejection of vouchers |
13 Nov 2007 11:07:48 PM |
|
|
On 13 Nov 2007 20:38:39 -0500, (Herman
Rubin) wrote:
In article <khtjj399ppvrq7pf4toa9ol0sh47750icb@4ax.com>,
Bob LeChevalier <lojbab@lojban.org> wrote:
cobalt@newscene.com (Kate ) wrote:
LOL, and you think the very very few private schools that actually do
this will be adequate for all of the millions of American children?
Of course not, but vouchers would make possible the
introduction of far more. It is only vouchers which
will allow the bright children of poor and middle
class parents to have any chance of an education
according to their abilities. I foresee also the
creation of electronic private schools, where the
classes will be like the present ones, but with
children grouped by ability, and with only electronic
contact between students and teachers.
That has happened in no way so far with private schools, why do you
think it will happen with vouchers?
Actually, there are apparently some high quality, ability-paced
private schools in this area, but their tuition runs upwards of $20K
per year. For example:
http://www.nysmith.com/final/index.html
There are some in the East, and a very small number
elsewhere. After the first year my son was in a
non-kindergarten class, with a program designed for
him by a school willing to even throw out the rule
book, the school suggested that he go to an academic
private school. One could not be found within 80
miles, and I was on the faculty of a major university.
Why doesn't your major university have a *lab school* that would be
able to accomodate gifted children?
University of Chicago Lab School is where the first *new math*
curriculum was tested, I believe.
--
Dorothy
There is no sound, no cry in all the world
that can be heard unless someone listens ..
The Outer Limits
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Herman Rubin" |
|
| Title: Re: Consistant voter rejection of vouchers |
13 Nov 2007 07:30:23 PM |
|
|
In article <475bbc3e.1224368750@news-west.newscene.com>,
Kate <cobalt@newscene.com> wrote:
On 12 Nov 2007 12:33:13 -0500, (Herman
Rubin) wrote:
In article <474925b4.923686859@news-west.newscene.com>,
Kate <cobalt@newscene.com> wrote:
On 9 Nov 2007 22:06:05 -0500, (Herman
Rubin) wrote:
In article <20g8j39lld4tf73j8abmp5doop0kj15o7c@4ax.com>,
<America@USA.now> wrote:
On 8 Nov 2007 12:27:10 -0500, (Herman Rubin) wrote:
Do you want schools in which children can learn
according to their abilities, taught by those who
understand their subjects ...
You don't need vouchers for that. In fact, the
vouchers exclude children who deserve better.
How many schools do we have which do not group by
age, and allow (and preferably) encourage children
to go at their pace?
How many schools have teachers who can teach concepts,
and do anything but memorization and rote?
How many have history teachers who know anything about
ancient history, mathematics teachers who know any
mathematics except how to calculate, physics teachers
who know what is going on in modern physics, and the
same for chemistry and biology?
The answer is few, and it is getting fewer. The
teachers are trained in classroom management, etc.,
and know little of subject matter. One of the
posters on the mathematics newsgroup questioned
whether the education courses required a lobotomy.
Academic schools essentially do not exist, except
possibly a few excuses for them at the middle or
high school levels. Those who should be going to
good colleges can do college material in their
subjects by their early teens, at the latest.
LOL, and you think the very very few private schools that actually do
this will be adequate for all of the millions of American children?
Of course not, but vouchers would make possible the
introduction of far more. It is only vouchers which
will allow the bright children of poor and middle
class parents to have any chance of an education
according to their abilities. I foresee also the
creation of electronic private schools, where the
classes will be like the present ones, but with
children grouped by ability, and with only electronic
contact between students and teachers.
That has happened in no way so far with private schools, why do you
think it will happen with vouchers?
The problem is money. Most private schools are religious,
or set up by people who can afford an expensive education.
Vouchers can make academic education affordable. Look
at the Marva Collins schools in Chicago.
The public schools do a great deal of DAMAGE in the
early years, and as they are set up, there is little
they can do about it, except possibly move them
along at their individual speeds. The cost to a
bright child of being delayed a year is greater than
the teacher's salary, and there is also the cost to
society. Teachers should be willing to say they are
not able to teach a child in a subject, and pass the
child along. A kindergarten child can be reading
well and doing high school or college mathematics.
Except so far, a lot of private schools are doing far worse DAMAGE to
kids and pretending they are not, while charging an arm and a leg for
it, with no compensation.
Some of them are, and some are not. The point is that
private schools now have to charge an arm and a leg.
We are not going to get reasonable schools NOW no matter
what we do. The development of decent teachers is going
to take decades, and as long as the current educationists
are deciding how the schools will be run, they can only
be bad.
Why don't you start by teaching people that education helps everyone,
not just the kids and their parents. That will do far more than a
useless voucher scheme.
It will not. The educationists will claim that they are
doing the kind of job which can be done, and not many
have seen anything else. During the Depression, there
were those who foresaw the downfall, but there was no
evidence on either side. Sputnik started a drive of
the type you were suggesting, on a larger scale than
a few individuals can get going, and the educationists
managed to subvert the whole thing. Bush, with the
No Child Left Behind, was taken in by the educationists,
and he has never seen anything else below the college
level.
Coming up with better schools cannot be done under the
current circumstances. The idea of children of different
abilities, and with differing amounts of knowledge,
learning by listening to someone who does not understand
the subject, often not as well as the student, all at
the same rate, can only be considered stupid. Some of
this had to be done when there was no good means of
communication except by slow movement of printed matter
or being in the same room, but this is not the case now.
Face it. Private schools don't do a better job of teaching than
public schools. All they do is baby sit little kids in sanitized
groups for wealthy urbanites.
Some of them are, and some of them are quite good.
During the Depression, you would have been completely
right. But the public schools went into decline, from
a subject orientation to a "child" orientation, with
age grouping and socialization emphasized. The weak
child does not benefit from the bright child in a class,
as it is clear that emulation is not possible. It is
the case that having someone ask good questions does
help the class, but it is still only those sufficiently
prepared and interested in learning who are helped.
The current public schools, as they are run, are hopeless.
The competition of affordable private schools MAY change
this, and it needs to be there.
I think you have little experience with public schools and private
ones.
I have no experience personally with private schools.
I do have experience with several public schools, and
know their weaknesses. I also have input from my
colleagues, and had from former colleagues, whose
children were in these schools. Most will not cooperate.
With lots of effort, and lots of money, and the willingness
to put those teachers who cannot understand in places where
they cannot get in the way, a dictator might be able to get
a good educational public school system established in 20
years, although I have been called optimistic on that.
But it will mean having less emphasis on athletic teams,
less socialization in general, and many never getting
a diploma which will be accepted by a decent college.
It may end up having school buildings for few purposes,
with most done electronically; an electronic school,
not needing large buildings, would be even cheaper to
set up.
It will be absolutely necessary to get rid of the
grade-credit system, and to make awarding of meaningful
documents by examination only, and the examination
might have to be lengthy. I am wary of straight A
students who have memorized for the tests and then
immediately forgotten the material.
--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
hrubin@stat.purdue.edu Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bob LeChevalier" |
|
| Title: Re: Consistant voter rejection of vouchers |
14 Nov 2007 12:02:29 AM |
|
|
(Herman Rubin) wrote:
In article <475bbc3e.1224368750@news-west.newscene.com>,
Kate <cobalt@newscene.com> wrote:
Of course not, but vouchers would make possible the
introduction of far more. It is only vouchers which
will allow the bright children of poor and middle
class parents to have any chance of an education
according to their abilities. I foresee also the
creation of electronic private schools, where the
classes will be like the present ones, but with
children grouped by ability, and with only electronic
contact between students and teachers.
That has happened in no way so far with private schools, why do you
think it will happen with vouchers?
The problem is money. Most private schools are religious,
or set up by people who can afford an expensive education.
Vouchers can make academic education affordable. Look
at the Marva Collins schools in Chicago.
Not really all that different from the status quo. Kids all advance
by grades with age grouping, and the program isn't significantly
accelerated.
Coming up with better schools cannot be done under the
current circumstances.
But it can. There ARE better schools, though not many. They just cost
$20+K per year in tuition, which was my point. Since around here
there would certainly be a market if they could do it cheaper, they
obviously can't do it cheaper.
lojbab
.
|
|
|
| User: "Herman Rubin" |
|
| Title: Re: Consistant voter rejection of vouchers |
14 Nov 2007 03:30:12 PM |
|
|
In article <jj3lj3loel16u24etb2svsthjoti9ecceo@4ax.com>,
Bob LeChevalier <lojbab@lojban.org> wrote:
hrubin@odds.stat.purdue.edu (Herman Rubin) wrote:
In article <475bbc3e.1224368750@news-west.newscene.com>,
Kate <cobalt@newscene.com> wrote:
Of course not, but vouchers would make possible the
introduction of far more. It is only vouchers which
will allow the bright children of poor and middle
class parents to have any chance of an education
according to their abilities. I foresee also the
creation of electronic private schools, where the
classes will be like the present ones, but with
children grouped by ability, and with only electronic
contact between students and teachers.
That has happened in no way so far with private schools, why do you
think it will happen with vouchers?
The problem is money. Most private schools are religious,
or set up by people who can afford an expensive education.
Vouchers can make academic education affordable. Look
at the Marva Collins schools in Chicago.
Not really all that different from the status quo. Kids all advance
by grades with age grouping, and the program isn't significantly
accelerated.
It is too small to do that as set up. This can be
changed with electronics.
Coming up with better schools cannot be done under the
current circumstances.
But it can. There ARE better schools, though not many. They just cost
$20+K per year in tuition, which was my point. Since around here
there would certainly be a market if they could do it cheaper, they
obviously can't do it cheaper.
lojbab
The present private schools are small and local. There is
the charter school movement, which seems to operate at about
the cost of public schools, if not cheaper. The current
public schools run in the neighborhood of 10K per year per
child, and this is mainly from public sources. There is
also the requirement now of school buildings, with prescribed
facilities; our Temple has at times housed charter schools,
and the last time, they paid for renovations needed to meet
state standards, which were not in effect before.
With electronics, we CAN get highly non-localized classes.
Now, a school may have a few gifted children in a subject
over many grades, and clearly does not have the resources
to give each set a separate class. We can try to get them
all together, but this is not easy, and there might still
not be enough, and the transportation is not cheap. However,
we can connect them cheaply by electronics. A suitable
computer is now less than 1K, and a dedicated internet
connection less than 1/2 K a year.
--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
hrubin@stat.purdue.edu Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "toto" |
|
| Title: Re: Consistant voter rejection of vouchers |
13 Nov 2007 07:32:35 PM |
|
|
On 12 Nov 2007 12:33:13 -0500, (Herman
Rubin) wrote:
Of course not, but vouchers would make possible the
introduction of far more. It is only vouchers which
will allow the bright children of poor and middle
class parents to have any chance of an education
according to their abilities. I foresee also the
creation of electronic private schools, where the
classes will be like the present ones, but
If a child is profoundly gifted, they can apply to the Davidson
Institute.
http://www.ditd.org/?gclid=CNHzjKSX248CFR6oIgodxRIX5A
A FREE Public Day School for Profoundly Gifted Learners
http://www.ditdservices.org/Articles.aspx?ArticleID=75&NavID=0_22
http://www.ditdservices.org/Articles.aspx?ArticleID=73&NavID=0_8
--
Dorothy
There is no sound, no cry in all the world
that can be heard unless someone listens ..
The Outer Limits
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
