Vouchers, a system of having the government, pay for, "private" education. Do they support, or hinder the goal of Making Americans, the goal of essentialists?
Back in the late 1800s, the goals of education were to produce citizens that were competent and loyal, according to Horace Mann. Can private schools still produce competent and loyal citizens, seeing as they aren't required to follow state standards, and set forms of uniformity? Teachers and parents, let me know what you think, and whether or not vouchers should be a part of our Arizona educational system. Answer these few questions as well: Are vouchers a threat to the idea of the common school, that had the primary goal of preserving the Republic that our founding fathers had in mind? Is that idea even important anymore; the idea of preserving the Republic, and our nation? Finally, while we do need an alternative to the public school system, especially when the public school system fails, are there other alternatives to the voucher program IF it's a threat to the common school? What about the public-charter school?
Here's a video, clearly in favor of vouchers, but I want, "your" opinions, and experience.
http://video.foxbusiness.com/v/1559363856001/the-growth-of-voucher-programs/?playlist_id=87185
Let me know what you think.
I think that private schools CAN do a fine job of educating students, but whether they do or not is dependent upon the teachers at each school. I think that a student can receive a great education at a private school, charter school, or even a public school, but only if they have devoted teachers that are invested in the students' learning. To me, vouchers are just a way for parents to think that their child is getting a better education because they are going to a private school, but more and more people are leaving the private schools for charters that offer the same or better education (and follow state standards) for free.
ReplyDeletePersonally, I do not want my daughter going to any of the "big districts" because I have seen that there is very little accountability. However, I also have no urge to send her to a private school because I see no difference in a private school, and a high quality charter school other than the amount of money spent.
I think that private schools can produce competent and loyal citizens, but I also feel that charter and district schools can do the same.
Vouchers threaten the neighborhood schools because it pulls students out of their district. So do charters though. Parents with the choice are what threaten common neighborhood schools. If a neighborhood school is failing, the students should be able to leave that school and make the choice, and if that choice sends them to a private school, that is the choice that the parents make.
Parents need the choice if their child is not learning in the neighborhood school. If the school is not meeting the needs or is not teaching the student what they need to be successful, the parents need the option to go elsewhere. If this is done through the student obtaining a voucher to go to a private school, or the parent researching charter schools is the parent's option.
Hi Kim,
DeleteI too think choice is important. However, with choice, the government shouldn't pay for it. For example, I have a choice between the cars I drive. Should the government subsidize my vehicle for me? What about the jewelry one wears, and the clothing one prefers? Where does the government draw the line in paying for, "private" desires? If it's private, parents should pay and if not, charters are there for them to chose from, and only then, does it make sense for the government to pay for the child's way, because they are regulated by the government, unlike private schools.
I think charter schools are the way to go if you don't like the school districts in your area. I understand why the voucher program started but if a parent wants to move their child, they need to do some research. They should find a school that best meets their needs and has a curriculum that their child will thrive in. There are so many good charters out there. Parents can find a school that meets their needs without taking a government voucher.
ReplyDeleteHi Emily,
DeleteI think that the government should pay for, "common schools" whether they're private, public, or charter. That's what the founding fathers wanted, and that's when we had a sense of making Americans. Not to mention, in several parental surveys, parents have also expressed the need for a solid, uniform curriculum! Believe it or not, the public desires this, even today. But, instead, in today's world, the government pays for educational experiments, such as Montessori charter schools (great for pre-schoolers by the way...and that's about it) and they pay for Waldorf charter schools, and all of these mis-matched curriculum structures! These schools are great for building student autonomy, but time after time, they don't achieve the scores required by the overseeing government.
Now, if people want to experiment with education, that's the great thing about America; they most certainly can. However, if the government funds the school, parameters should be set, that those schools funded with the tax payer dollar, should be the American traditional, "common schools."
Vouchers for equality in education. As a parent of six children, I am responsible for their education. That responsibility includes finding an alternative education if the local public school does not meet my criteria in educating my children. The choices today are greater than when my children were attending school. Parents must research these choices and discover the school that meets the needs of their children. Vouchers may have their place in academic selection but they also put a lot of pressure on the parents and children desiring to be selected for the voucher. The government should not pay for any child to attend a private school; this burden should lie on the shoulders of the private institution.
ReplyDeletePatti,
ReplyDeleteHow do vouchers assure, "equality in education?" Please explain, as your first idea isn't entirely clear to me.
Likewise, you stated: "Parents must research these choices and discover the school that meets the needs of their children."
However, essentialists would say, that instead, what matters is preparing the children for the needs of, "society," and the needs of the, "republic," as the common schools used to do.
Should the goal really be to meet the needs of the children, and if so, in what regard? Did you mean their individual needs, such as their interests, and behavioral needs, or their academic needs so they can go into society as a loyal, and successful contributing member to society? What should parents decide upon? What should a school's goal be, with regards to the child's needs?
I do not know very much about the voucher program. I think that if the public school system didn’t fail so often we wouldn’t need so many alternatives to the public system. I am not sure that a private school is a threat to common school. I think that you can and should learn the same ideals that are taught in public school as far as preserving the nation. I think that at a private school the children are taught what is taught in public school and then even more. I think preserving the nation is important because this is our country and we should fight to protect it. I believe that children learn a lot of their beliefs and feelings about our nation from their family and not from the school. They learn history but often don’t learn about the meaning or effect that the events had on our nation or why those events are still relevant today.
ReplyDeletePrivate school IS a threat to the common school and here's why.
ReplyDeletePrivate agencies (schools) can teach whatever they want; even underwater basket weaving all day long, or more famously, religion. However, believers in the common school want topics of the Republic emphasized such as Cicero, Thomas Hobbes, John Lock, and more. So, with private schooling, anything's fair game because of the lack of government oversight. Don't get me wrong, I cannot stand a government that oversteps it's boundaries. However, their role is to preserve individual freedoms, and protect us from threats! The number one threat to our freedom and national security, is our lack of strong educational systems, thus, these too should have some sense of curriculum requirements as we serve children of our nation. Since we don't have anything like that, parents and teachers should chose schools who set out to teach these ideals to children, even without government intervention of common school curricula.
I agree that children learn a lot of their beliefs and gain their feelings about our nation from their family and not from the school. Let me tell you the scary side of this.
How many adults, who've bore children, can recite the Preamble, explain the four major parts of the Declaration of Independence introduction, identify the author of that document, explain what led to the Revolutionary war, identify where our founders received their inspiration from, tell you how many articles our Constitution has, and list and discuss the Constitutional amendments? Point made. This is scary that parents are passing down ideals that are disconnected from what our founding fathers wanted years ago. They wanted, "liberty" not Americans to have a sense of entitlement. The disconnect is dangerous, and here's why.
With the ideals of the founding fathers, that have served us for the past two centuries, our country has been the strongest for the past 235 years. Thus, these wise men must have known what they were doing, with regards to giving the great people of America, a Republic, and as Ben Franklin famously said, "if we can keep it."
Alternatives to the public school system are great, and are indeed needed, so that parents can chose the common schools again!