Arkansas Blog

"But voucher supporters said the findings prove private schools are educating voucher students as well as public schools, and for a lot less money. Per-pupil spending in Florida is about $7,000 a year. A voucher costs taxpayers $3,950."

"Vouchers are available to any student who qualifies for free or reduced lunch. But [the report's author] found that students who accept them are more likely to be minorities, and be poorer. And while in public schools, they tended to be among the lowest performers. The latter finding undermines an argument by anti-voucher critics."

--- Yeah, but I bet these poor Black kids have parents who are involved in their education. How shameful that they would make use of choices that are provided for them!

It would be nice if Max Brantley could actually tell the truth about the study. Data are not yet available to answer the question that Max says was answered. You opponents of school choice are so afraid of the results that you want the poor black kids thrown out of the private schools before there's a chance for them to benefit significantly from the program. Longitudinal data are needed to evaluate the program to compare apples to apples, per the author of the study. Given the shock of changing schools, I wouldn't expect a huge improvement the first year. Once the second year data is available we will begin to see if there is a trend.

Data has been coming in on the Florida voucher program for more than 10 years. More importantly, 36 states won't allow vouchers due to constitutional challenges involving separation of church and state. As to the funding savings -- their are pitfalls left unmentioned (click on name); the cost almost reflects the difference in teacher pay between private & public schools, the far lower amount of technology used, the additional costs mandated by federal rules for special needs students, etc.

The two tests being compared between the private and public school students are not even the same. The study was commissioned by pro-voucher advocates and produced results below those anticipated. This voucher program has been in place over 10 years and a steady stream of reports over these years belies the claim that we need a longer period of time to study this endeavor.

If anything, the study highlights the libertarians claim that there is too much government regulation adding to the cost of running a school (but the article linked by my name shows that this libertarian principle doesn't extend to special needs students). And, it possibly reinforces the claim that private school teachers are paid far less than they are worth.

It is comparing apples and oranges, unfortunately, so the arguments will go on and on, much to the detriment of education.

And when it continues to show no difference or even poorer results in the schools with the abbreviated funding, what sophistry will you disseminate to try to reaffirm your political predilections then, Severus.

Yes, private schools can provide a better more enriched and challenging learning environment for students. Preparatory schools like Concord Academy, Deerfield Academy, Groton School, Hockaday School, Hotchkiss School, Middlesex School, Milton Academy, Peddie School, Phillips Academy Andover, Phillips Exeter Academy, St. Paul's School, Thomas Jefferson, The Athenian School, Cate School, Choate Rosemary Hall have been providing superior education experiece for decades, but at a much higher cost and with vastly more accomplished faculty and facilities. However, the majority of the "charter schools" and "voucher schools" will suffer from their lack of funding, inability to provide stability of employment of good teachers and a dearth of good faculty. Some may persevere to become additional high level preparaory schools in the way of Choate, Phillips Exeter St. Paul's etcetera.

But we will not significantly improve the education of our children and our country until we improve our public education system to compete with other countries in the world with better public educations systems. Vouchers just delay this necessary change and improvement.

Sorry about the link. Here it is.

BTW, the low technology cost refers to private schools.

Dott, your listing of elite schools and academic super schools is an example of the outlier effect. People assume that these exclusive types of schools are the panacea for the remainder of the great middle ground of students but that is not the case.

Proponents for expanding voucher programs do not see that bigger is not necessarily better. In fact, growth will be limited by several factors. I posted research on this a few months back and will try. if I don't have too much on my honey-do list tomorrow, to find that article again. Like the students, I too would like a summer break.

When something is broken, and you're not sure how to fix it, then trying something, anything, is better than maintaining the status quo.

If we keep doing what we're doing, we'll keep getting what we're getting, in other words.

Other than merit pay (which matters little, as any organizational behavior text will teach you and as we see with the significant difference between lower-paid private school and higher-paid public school teachers), what else is on the table to improve public schools?

I don't think creating a parallel school system is the answer -- but I applaud the attempt at innovation.

Those who shoot down and criticize anything they see as threatening to the public school system, from charter schools to distance education to homeschooling to whatever, do have the best interests of our society at heart -- but they're also defending the status quo and thus helping to destroy what they want to protect.

We need to completely throw out our paradigm of what school is and reengineer the process. Perhaps even without the involvement of any stakeholder in the current system, if you want to find true change.

ARK. BLOG: I'll buy that. What I'm pushing back against here is the assumption that something -- anything -- must be better than the conventional public school because of the unstated belief that all public schols suck. Many of them don't. Just as many private schools and charter schools don't suck. What we find -- over and over -- is that outcomes are highly predictable. Kids from educated, economically stable families tend to succeed at school. Kinds from uneducated, unstable poor families don't do so hot. What we haven't figured out, despite episodic successes, is a way to replicate pattern-breaking schools for vast numbers of the hard cases, particularly when parents aren't involved. But, in the meanwhile, we have to consider what willy nilly diversions of publc resources to the next flavor that comes along can do to what I think has been a bedrock of the American experience -- universal public education, open to all comers no matter how ready or difficult, with total public oversight.

Excellent post, Country Boy. If you're interested in a top notch writer and researcher who thinks along similar lines, I recommend you google Eduwonk + Andrew Rotherham. I believe you will like his viewpoints. His attempts to rise above the bickering and the arcane economic dissection of limited data and to take a much broader look at all the reasonable factors that come to play in a problem -- these set him a cut above the opposing players.

I stated earlier that bigger would not be better for the voucher program and mentioned a report previously provided. I located it. It's from the Century Foundation and you can click on my name for the entire article.

". . . When something is broken, and you're not sure how to fix it, then trying something, anything, is better than maintaining the status quo. . . ." Not necessarily, Country Boy. My high school in my senior year tried something, anything. The High School led the state for about three or four years in National Merit Scholars and had had two in two successive years who scored perfect 900's on the SAT tests.

But the School Board decided to "innovate." They had a brand new school facility and sterling record so why not? They instituted a "modular system" instead of allowing the teacher to teach class fifty minutes a day, five days a week. They brilliantly decided that the students would benefit more by the teacher only teaching 75 minute two days a week or teaching 50 minutes three days a week. The time saved by not having class could be spent by the students in special studies or projects supervised by the teachers.

So what was the happened. The teachers had their teaching time reduced by 28% and the student had and additional 70 minutes of study hall in each class that semester. The content taught was reduced to less than 3/4 of the previously required content and every student, whether they signed up for a study hall period or not, had 9 hours of study hall time. No student every had to take homework home and they had only 72% of the content previously taught to learn.

What was the result? The student knowledge levels and comprehension dropped despite a number of outstanding independent studies and projects, When the student graduated, they had under-developed study and work habit and many, including one of the student who scored 900/900 nearly flunked out of freshment year in college and took sevelral years to recover grade point and the study and work habits that should have been formed as a junior and senior in High School.

Something, anything was a disasterin that High School for several years and it has never really recovered.

Max & Dott make good counterpoints to your contentions Country Boy. I still encourage you to read the works of Rotherham, especially to get a handle on the research picture on this and other topics. The status quo argument has been used quite often by the charter/voucher supporters and there is good reason to question the premises it is based upon.

On a lighter note, you seem willing to look at more evidence (as we all should). One of the concerns of the educational community, especially the researchers, has been the warlike atmosphere that has broken out due to researchers taking their findings to the public more so than to their peers. Education has become highly politicized and this may be because of this or it may be causing this. It is hard to tell. Certainly, the civility and tone of the discussion has been rancorous at times between opposing camps.

test