toldailytopic: School vouchers, are you for, or against them?

Nathon Detroit

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
The TheologyOnline.com TOPIC OF THE DAY for December 20th, 2011 10:06 AM


toldailytopic: School vouchers, are you for, or against them?






Take the topic above and run with it! Slice it, dice it, give us your general thoughts about it. Everyday there will be a new TOL Topic of the Day.
If you want to make suggestions for the Topic of the Day send a Tweet to @toldailytopic or @theologyonline or send it to us via Facebook.
 

some other dude

New member
The big city I live near did something similar about twenty years ago. It was a disaster. What had been a struggling system with pockets of excellence has become a system with universal failure.
 

OMEGA

New member
School Vouchers

School Vouchers are government grants aimed at improving education for the children of low-income families by providing school tuition that can be used at public or private schools. The idea behind school vouchers is to give parents a wider choice of educational institutions and approaches; it is also assumed that competition from private schools will pressure public schools into providing a better education for their students. The first school-voucher program instituted in the United States was a state-funded effort begun in Milwaukee, Wis., in 1990; a 1995 federal bill proposed setting up pilot school-voucher plans in 26 American cities.

The voucher concept has been controversial, and critics have voiced concerns that such programs, if broadly applied, ultimately could destroy the American public-school system. The issue of the constitutionality of taxpayer-financed vouchers was sidestepped at the federal level in 1998 when the Supreme Court chose not to review a state court ruling that upheld the use of vouchers in Milwaukee. In 1999, however, a federal court held that when a voucher system used in Ohio resulted in almost all recipients attending religious instead of public schools the system violated the Constitution, but in 2002 the Supreme Court narrowly ruled that the program provided "true private choice." Meanwhile, in Florida a program was initiated (1999) in which vouchers, good at private religious and nonreligious schools, were given to children whose public schools had failed standardized tests, but the program has been challenged in the state courts. By the end of the 20th cent. various kinds of voucher programs were being implemented in 31 U.S. states and were utilized by nearly 65,000 students. There is no incontrovertible evidence that the use of vouchers has improved the education of students using them, either at private or public schools, but often it also is not clear whether poor educational results are in fact the fault of the schools or the result of other causes.
 

OMEGA

New member
What I do not understand is why the US Government did not use Television

to Educate the Whole Nation.

We could have had a far Superiorly Educated Population

compared to the Japanese and Europeans.

Instead, we have Violence and Foolishness from the California Ferries.:banana::devil::vomit:
----------------------------------------------------------------
 

keypurr

Well-known member
I think the local community should be responsible for their childs education. And any public funds not given to religious schools. To make everyone happy we must seperated Religion and State. Regional schools might be a better answer.
 

PureX

Well-known member
I'm against school vouchers because they're just another way of avoiding dealing with the problems of our public education system. Private schools can't take in every student that's in a bad public school, and so they will select out only the better students. This leaves the ones who need the most help behind in the bad public school, where they're least likely to get it. And that only increases the extremes when it comes to who gets saved and who gets screwed. Not only that, but the money we spend on vouchers will be money that we won't spend on the public schools, and so they'll get even worse.

Let's just fix the bad school, so that all the students can get a good education, and then we won't need the vouchers.
 

Sherman

I identify as a Christian
Staff member
Administrator
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
On the surface they sound like a good idea. But America is just flat broke. We are in debt over our head. I don't think the government should be in the business of educating our kids period. That should be up to the parents and the churches. Vouchers along with public education is a bad idea.
 

Nathon Detroit

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
Before I can give a response, what exactly are school vouchers?
In theory it works like this... Every family already pays taxes to fund the government school system. But some families would rather choose private or religious schools. Therefore under a voucher system the government would issue you a voucher so that you could pay to have your child attend the school of your choice.

It's supposed to be a way for you to spend your educational tax dollars the way you see fit.
 

PureX

Well-known member
What I do not understand is why the US Government did not use Television

to Educate the Whole Nation.

We could have had a far Superiorly Educated Population

compared to the Japanese and Europeans.

Instead, we have Violence and Foolishness from the California Ferries.:banana::devil::vomit:
----------------------------------------------------------------
The answer is money.

Corporate advertising saw TV as a huge new opportunity to get at the buying public. So they immediately began paying people to produce TV entertainment would draw people to their advertising. No educational program could compete with TV "shows" that were specifically designed to attract people to watch them. And there was a whole lot of money to be made selling that advertising time. So for TV to work as an educational tool, it would have to be forced into doing it. And in America, making money trumps all other human inclinations.
 

Buzzword

New member
Inzl Kett said:
I don't think the government should be in the business of educating our kids period. That should be up to the parents and the churches.

Kinda hard for parents to take charge of their children's education when they're too busy working multiple jobs and still not making ends meet because American employers refuse to take care of their employees.
 

PureX

Well-known member
It's supposed to be a way for you to spend your educational tax dollars the way you see fit.
The problem, of course, is that every dollar spent via a voucher, is not spent on the public schools, as it was supposed to be. So the public schools suffer as the private schools gain. In theory, the public schools would have to learn how to function better and more efficiently, because of the competition, but in reality that isn't what happens. What happens is that the public schools fall apart from lack of support.

All competition really does is exaggerate the extremes while it eliminates the middle.
 

Rusha

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Definitely for them because it would give more parents the option of sending their child/children to the school of their choice.
 

The Barbarian

BANNED
Banned
So, if I don't like the Postal Service, I should get a "mailing voucher" to support a UPS office in my community?

And if I don't like the commuter train, I should get a "transportation voucher" to buy a car?

Seriously? Big Nanny can't solve all your problems.
 

Rusha

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
So, if I don't like the Postal Service, I should get a "mailing voucher" to support a UPS office in my community?

No ...

And if I don't like the commuter train, I should get a "transportation voucher" to buy a car?

No ...

Seriously? Big Nanny can't solve all your problems.

I didn't say it could ... we were speaking of vouchers and the public VS private schooling.

I think a parent should be able to decide what education system they support via their taxes. Perhaps if the public schools faced the possibility of losing a good portion of their students and funding, they would feel the need to give the same quality of education and individual attention to the students that private schools are able to offer.
 

The Berean

Well-known member
What I do not understand is why the US Government did not use Television

to Educate the Whole Nation.

We could have had a far Superiorly Educated Population

compared to the Japanese and Europeans.

Instead, we have Violence and Foolishness from the California Ferries.:banana::devil::vomit:
----------------------------------------------------------------

The answer is money.

Corporate advertising saw TV as a huge new opportunity to get at the buying public. So they immediately began paying people to produce TV entertainment would draw people to their advertising. No educational program could compete with TV "shows" that were specifically designed to attract people to watch them. And there was a whole lot of money to be made selling that advertising time. So for TV to work as an educational tool, it would have to be forced into doing it. And in America, making money trumps all other human inclinations.

The future of education is the Internet. Here in Silicon Valley a man Salman Khan started making teaching videos for a relative. He had other family members and friends started asking for his videos so he uploaded them to Youtube. His Khan Academy website has grown tremendously. He now has 2,700+ teaching videos in a wide assortment of topics. These videos can be used from junior high school students to college student.

From wikipedia:

In late 2004, Khan began tutoring his cousin, Nadia, in mathematics over the internet using Yahoo!'s Doodle notepad When other relatives and friends sought his tutoring, he decided it would be more practical and beneficial to distribute the tutorials on YouTube where he created an account on 16 November 2006.Their popularity on the video sharing website and the testimonials of appreciative students prompted Khan to quit his job as a hedge fund analyst in late 2009 to focus on developing his YouTube channel, 'Khan Academy', full-time.

His videos attracted on average more than 20,000 hits each. Students from around the world have been attracted to Khan's concise, practical, and relaxed teaching method.

Khan outlined his mission as to "accelerate learning for students of all ages. With this in mind, we want to share our content with whoever may find it useful." Khan also plans to extend his "free school" to cover topics such as English and history. Programs are being undertaken to use Khan's videos to teach those in isolated areas of Africa and Asia. He delineated his motives:

"With so little effort on my own part, I can empower an unlimited amount of people for all time. I can't imagine a better use of my
time."

His teaching videos are first rate. Last years I took a master's level statistics course and I used his statistics videos to augment my learning. They were quite helpful. I like that fact that he does this for free and refuses to make his videos a for-profit venture. He wants his video to be available for EVERYONE not just kids with money.
 
Last edited:

some other dude

New member
The future of education is the Internet. Here in Silicon Valley a man Salman Khan started making teaching videos for a relative. He had other family members and friends started asking for his videos so he uploaded them to Youtube. His Khan Academy website has grown tremendously. He now has 2,700+ teaching videos in a wide assortment of topics. These videos can be used from junior high school students to college student.

From wikipedia:



His teaching videos are first rate. Last years I took a master's level statistics course and I used his statistics videos to augment my learning. They were quite helpful. I like that fact that he does this for free and refuses to make his videos a for-profit venture. He wants his video to available for EVERYONE not just kids with money.



There's a role for this sort of thing in the adolescent education environment, but it is only effective with the motivated student - the student who already wants to do better.

For the general population, days in the computer lab are play days.
 

The Berean

Well-known member
There's a role for this sort of thing in the adolescent education environment, but it is only effective with the motivated student - the student who already wants to do better.

For the general population, days in the computer lab are play days.

I was such a student growing up. I'd spend hours upon hours at the public library reading all sorts of books. The idea of not wanting to learn is so foreign to me. Why do you think many kids think this way? :idunno:
 
Last edited:
Top