You sure about that or are you just assuming?
Did you read the article in the OP?
The student has special needs.
It is an assumption.
IWhy would they stop raising money unless they knew they had they nut covered?
The school seems to specialize in that.
Did you read this part:
Vavra says since being at Summit, her daughter is no longer falling behind. She also gets additional help from a tutor, which is expensive. âRight now, like, our tutoring is about $6,000 annually,â Vavra said.
Iâd be willing to bet if the parents hadnât committed to the tutoring, the kid would not have been admitted.
Did you see where I said the voucher should be equal to the cost per student in public education?
I am very much in favor of weeding out the riff-raff who donât want an education.
Either public schools start excelling in education excellence or they will just become a place where parentâs who donât give a crap send their kids.
Yes, it is an assumption.
I donât know why they stopped fundraising. Maybe, find out first before making assumptions.
What voucher programs do in practice, is make this problem worse.
All the families that have an interest in their kids education and are invovled enough to give it some thought, and who have a kid bright enough to get into a private school, and who, importantly, can afford; private busing, books, uniforms, after school activites, tutors, trip fees, etcâŚIOW all the things that private schools DONâT pay for, send their kids to a private school, leaving behind in the public school the kids with less interested partents, who are generally harder to educate.
So the sending district gets worse and worse while the kids who would do well anywhere go off with their public dollars to a private school.
She is no longer falling behind. The tutor is supplemental so that her child can keep up in classes.
She absolutely does not want her daughter removed from that school.
So there are consequences to her choice. Thatâs how it goes with capitalism. Sheâs got another choice.
Iâm happy to see you finally get it.
Public dollars have to pay for an education. If little Jonnie canât read at 5th grade level in 5th grade he needs to be held back.
The standards have been slipping for decades. With all of the money we throw at education, we should be seeing much better results than we do.
Used to be? A high school education opened doors. When kids graduate from high school they should be extremely well educated.
1 Like
Sheâs doing it wrong.
How did the government earn that money?
3 Likes
Respectfully, I donât think you are hearing me.
First, you claimed the cost of the private education was what, about $14,000, right?
Turns out thatâs not true in this case. The cost of this kidâs education is $14,000 +$6,000 for tutoring. And the article doesnât say one way or the other, but in my expereinces, private schools often make these additional expenses known up front and the commitment to using them conditional for enrollment.
So the point is, the people who take the vouchers and send their kids elsewhere - they canât just depend on the voucher to pay their kidâs way. There are tons of other costs with private schools, things that public schools provide for no chare. Tutoring, uniforms, books - my gosh, have you had to buy text books lately? - activity charges, etcâŚ
And if you think private schools donât consider their families ability to pay these add on costs during the admissions process, you are naive.
This passage is the point:
Currently, Vavra pays $492 for tuition after the voucher kicks in. Next year, sheâll have to pay $6,715 after it kicks in. âShe still needs tutoring and so it is a question of how now are we going to afford both of these things? I donât want to pull her out of this school,â Vavra said.
And now, this school is back in line with what studies reveal nationwide. Voucher programs never pay the full cost of private tutition. There are exceptions, most notably parochial schools. So again, point one is reinforced.
Summit is going to be taking public money - and my guess is, this is why they can suspend fundraising. Wealthy families who could likely afford Summit anyway will get their private school educations subsidized.
And the public school, which provides tutoring, books, transportation, handicap accommodations, (both phyical plant accomodations andâŚI foret the termâŚTAs who shadow the kid all day, one to one) is left to educate the kids who canât afford or canât get in to private schoolsâŚThatâs my second point.
Vouchers send the money needed to teach Johnny to private institutions who wonât let Johnny in because he isnât bright.
Are we denying Brandonflarion?
Why should Jimmy, who is bright, have to go down to the lowest common denominator Johnny?
Whose money?
4 Likes
Letâs first acknowledge reality.
Jimmy, who is bright, isnât going anywhere with just a voucher. As the example in the OP article shows, vouchers never pay full freight. So unless Jimmy is bright and from a family of means, heâs not going anywhere.
So a better question is, why does Freddie get to use his voucher and go to private school, but Jimmy, who is bright, but dirt poor, cannot?
Also:
Four recent rigorous studiesâin the District of Columbia, Louisiana, Indiana, and Ohioâused different research designs and reached the same result: on average, students that use vouchers to attend private schools do less well on tests than similar students that do not attend private schools. The Louisiana and Indiana studies offer some hints that negative effects may diminish over time. Whether effects ever will become positive is unclear.
Thatâs all wrong.
Do wealthy people owe poor people?
âTestsâ
