Do you support educational vouchers in schools?

On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 20:56:22 -0500, toto
wrote:

On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 23:47:08 GMT, "Don"
wrote:

Lets summarize:
1) Homeschooling provides a superior education and teaches kids to learn
throughout their lives.

For some homeschooled children this is true. OTOH, I know several who
were not and are not being educated at all through homeschooling.

One young man who was pulled out of school by his mother when he was
in 3rd grade lives on disability and welfare along with his family.
Mom works, no one else in the family does at present and he cannot get
a job despite the fact that he is intelligent mainly because he is
lacking in English skills and math skills. He was not being served
well by the public school he went to, but he certainly did not get a
better education at home.

Several children I know have returned to the public schools well
behind the norm for their age and the public schools then get the
blame for their lagging skills when it was the homeschooling that
did worse by them.

I've known several homeschooling families whose children are, imo,
being neglected by the parents claiming to be their educators.
Several kids coming to the library couldn't read, yet were supposedly
at 3rd and 4th grade level. Very sad.

Nan

On 29 Apr 2005 10:31:25 -0500, (Herman
Rubin) wrote:

In article ,
wrote:
On 28 Apr 2005 13:33:42 -0500, (Herman
Rubin) wrote:

In article ,
wrote:
On Wed, 27 Apr 2005 14:00:56 -0400, "George" george@least wrote:


Is the purpose education or indoctrination? The parent with a voucher can
choose, the parent without cannot.

The "purpose" of what? Vouchers? The purpose of school vouchers is
to get the "public" to pay for your personal choices. Seems like a
bad idea to me, and fortunately, to most other people as well.

Do you mean that the people in power should have the right
to say what school a child should go to, and make it the
same regardless of the child's ability to learn?

I mean precisely what I said. The PUBLIC, as a WHOLE, gets to decide.

For one, the public does NOT decide.

That's total nonsense, Herman, and you should know better. What
happens in this country is dictated by popular support; ie, "the
public".

If you mean the purpose of education, that is frankly irrelevant to
the argument on vouchers, number one, and poorly defined (if at all)
in general. Ostensibly it is a program, funded by the public, for the
benefit OF society as a whole.

The present system was designed under the assumption that the
public schools are there to train people for routine menial
jobs, such as rust belt and assembly line activities.

I seriously doubt, Herman, that there was ever a concrete mandate for
what the schools were to accomplish. Certainly schooling was not
required to farm, for example, yet schools existed in farming
communities. This suggests quite strongly that you are in error in
stating that the purpose was to prepare people for routine menial
jobs. A "routine menial job" doesn't require much in the way of
schooling.

As for the "public" deciding, there are many places in the
country where the voters would push for athletics, and let
academics go down.

And one could argue that this CLEARLY indicates that the PUBLIC
decides the course that "education" and the schools will follow - Just
as I said above.

As such, the whole structure is rotten. It cannot be repaired.

In your opinion, which has been notoriously flawed in the past. You
claim that things were better in the past. If we accept that
statement, then the "structure" is amenable to change. If THAT is
true, then there is absolutely no reason why it cannot change for the
better. It is up to the PUBLIC, however, to decide the direction that
PUBLIC education will take.

They were better, but not what we can do now.

Then you agree with me. Splendid. Change IS possible.

Unfortunately, we cannot do it quickly.

Well, look on the bright side, Herman. Gradual change is less likely
to go seriously astray.

As I have stated before, if you give
me unlimited power and unlimited funding,

The very thought of giving you such a mandate staggers the imagination
and conjures images of looming disaster.

Also, we have to question VERY seriously if there should be
publicly controlled education.

No, Herman, "we" do not have to do any such thing.

In that sense, it is intended to
provide children a minimum level of understanding so that they might
become productive citizens of that society.

And keep them to that minimum level so that they cannot
contribute what their talents and abilities will allow.

Though you insist on disagreeing, it is not so much an issue of
"keeping them at that minimum level" as it is an issue of assigning
priorities since resources are limited. The highly gifted, the only
group you really care about, represent a small fraction of the total
population, and they can reach the "minimum level of understanding"
easily and without requiring too much in the way of resources.

Would allowing bright children to be allowed to work on their
own tie up resources?

Nothing stopping that right now. In point of fact, a couple of my
students are studying advanced topics in physics on their own at this
moment.

Would exempting children from being
placed in classes where they know the material do so?

Anyone can take a Regents exam in a specific subject in NY for credit.

The
REST of the population, however, often requires a very large
investment in resources to meet that level (and in many cases,
unfortunately, STILL do not really reach it).

I have suggested ways in which the rest of the population
would get better understanding with no more loss of time.

Yes, but your suggestions are grounded in your very limited exposure
to college track students who were accepted to Purdue, whereas I see
the other 80% of the population. Your assumptions are poorly founded,
so your suggestions are unrealistic.

The "new math" was supposed to do this, and would have
worked if the teachers could handle it.

Total nonsense, as I've pointed out on several occasions, but since
you ignore anything that doesn't fit into your preconceptions, there
really isn't any point in beating around this particular bush with you
for the umpteenth time. You're wrong.

Your focus is limited
to that small fraction, whereas society's focus is necessarily on the
vast majority, ESPECIALLY the very weakest fraction. You may disagree
with that priority, but that is the way the public wants it to be (at
least at present).

If we want to call keeping everyone down to the level of
the village idiot success, the schools are successful.
It is NOT the case that all can be educated to the level
which the average child can achieve without running into
too much difficulty.

I quite agree. There will be kids who are below average, and by
definition, they will not be able to perform to the level of an
average kid. Nor can an average kid perform to the level of an above
average kid. So the mandate is to provide whatever resources are
required to move the below average kids to a minimum acceptable level,
and with whatever resources remain, to enhance the learning for the
average and above average kids. When the resources run out, that's
it. You want more then you need more money dedicated to public
education (more taxes, etc), OR the parents have to personally pick up
the tab. That's simply the way it is.

The public did not sign
on to let particular parents "have it their way", nor as some kind of
guarantee that everyone who wants to can become the next Einstein.

No, they want a guarantee that someone who can add to our
knowledge does not get a chance to do so.

Too silly for comment.

Give it a rest, Herman; I personally agree that we are shortchanging
our very best students, but I also KNOW (unlike you) that our very
best students generally have a reasonable amount of resources devoted
to them.

Some of them manage to escape the damage. I would use LESS
resources for the ones with promise by letting them learn in
other ways.

Nothing preventing that right now.

This is obvious in that the US always fares well at the top
levels of competition in physics, for example. If our best kids were
woefully outclassed internationally, then I'd agree with you
unreservedly, but that simply isn't the case. To devote MORE to them
would shortchange the very weakest group, where we struggle just to
get them to reach the MINIMUM level of competency. The public will
not accept shortchanging the lowest group to benefit the highest
group.

My son took his first mathematics competition at age nine,
as a member of the Palo Alto Junior High School team. His
score was about 50%, most of what was not done was due to
unfamiliarity with some tricks. I was very surprised to
learn that this put him in the top 10%; junior high schools
and high schools in the county presumably included their
best students on the teams, and they presumably prepared
for the exams.

Your point being..? That a privately tutored kid in a 1 to 1
relationship with a college professor and possessed (no doubt) of a
superior level intellect, and whose tutor is also his parent who can
exert some actual control over his efforts, can outperform a lot of
kids who do not have any of those advantages? Duh...

It
provides the flexibility to allow parents to "have it their way" only
if they have the ability to foot the resulting bill. Complicating the
issue is, of course, the requirement of separation of church and
state.

I have never shown any brief for religious schools. But
the public schools seem to be a well-designed instrument
to destroy or weaken, and in any case delay, the minds of
those who can contribute more than the average.

Only if one agrees to participate in your fixation on reasoning based
on conspiracy theories.

Was there a conspiracy in the Catholic Church when they
rejected Galileo's teachings?

Here I would say yes. The Church as an entity went after Galileo.

Is there a religious conspiracy now rejecting evolution?

Here I would say no. This is being driven largely by Fundamental
Christians, a very small portion of the Protestant movement. This is
more of a grassroots effort by individuals. Where they make inroads
is in areas where there is a large proportion of people with similar
beliefs. Another example of the course of "education" and schools
being determined by the public. That you want the schools to adhere
to YOUR personal beliefs is little different in principle, but you
lack sufficient support to push your personal agenda. Yours would be
a "conspiracy" also if you had anyone to conspire WITH.

Faith-based totalitarianism acts as a conspiracy. The new
math was introduced because a mathematician found that his
daughter had mastered arithmetic, and had no understanding
of numbers, and he and his colleagues, and those at other
universities, worked out a program to teach that to the
average child, and it was tested on lots of them.

And vigorous lobbied against by OTHER mathematicians. Yadda, yadda,
yadda; we've been through all this before.

In article . net, Don says...

"Herman Rubin" wrote
We have to import foreign students to get good degrees,
or to handle the "high-tech" jobs in computing. Graduate
schools often have to give American students two years to
catch up with what could be expected 30 years ago. The
situation is getting worse.

The first 2 years of college are routinely used for remedial education these
days.
And that is exactly what people like Bob LeChevalier, Banty and Raqueteer
want.
Having lost their individuality long ago, been sufficiently dumbed down,
they have been powerless all of their lives and wish for others to be
likewise.
They are violently jealous of those that have more than they, and will do
all they can (which isn't much, except run their yaps in USENET) to harm
children and their education.


LOL! Gotta keep the world away from Big Bad Bob and Banty!

::snip loooong canned rant::

When parents truly care about their kids, rather than paying whiney lip
service and little else, and decide that the quality of their kid's
education is *their* responsibility, not the states or the socialists, they
quickly find that Homeschooling is the only real alternative. Thats why 10's
of thousands of students are being witheld from the public farce each year
and the numbers are growing in leaps and bounds. Caring parents are making
their way *in spite* of the overbearing financial obstacle of paying for the
state daycare while additionally paying for their own kids education.

The very first thing the socialist whiners cry about are the sob lack of
social opportunities for the homeschoolers. As if the social opportunities
in the public schools are something to laud. Homeschoolers have far greater
social resources than is available to those kids trapped in the very narrow
scope of the public prisons. Besides, if the socialist whiners were focusing
on their own kids properly they'd have little time or resources to stick
their fat, pock marked noses into other people's business.

::snip yadda yadda ("fat, pocked marked" - huh??)::

For being so long on opinions about education, you sure are short on critical
thinking. Fer starters, you're sure short on facts.

You don't know which schools educated Banty, and you don't know Banty's opinion
on homeschooling (which happens to be guardedly positive, but I guess Googling
is beyond your range of capability as well). But, hey, don't let ignorance stop
you.

You're useless for discussion - you just use other newsgroup participants as
straight men for your comic rantings.

But you are kinda entertaining...

Banty the Evul Socialistic Woefully Educated Bitch

"Banty" wrote in message
...
In article t, Don
says...


"Banty" wrote
This works. There *is* choice. Vouchers are not about choice - they're
all
about money. They're about siphoning money to those who don't
understand
that
public schools are for social, not necessarily individual, benefit.

There ya go, an admitted socialist.



No, not really.

Yes, really.

And whatever label you want to throw around("socialist",
"LIEberal", "oogabooga"), it doesn't constitute a cogent argument.

Whats the matter, you don't like the hat you've chosen?

I'm still waiting to hear how you're getting along with no roads and no
fire
protection..

I paved my own road and I designed the fire sprinkler system in my home.
Now go steal something from someone else.

"toto" wrote
Ah, yes, exposure to the *misfits.* Why don't you just say you don't
want your child exposed to anyone who is the least bit different from
yourself and your family.

yawn
You've been dismissed early from class today, Dorothy, for lack of attention
span.
Complete the required detention period and you *may* be rewarded back into
the class.
Move on.

Leave your emotions at the door. We are talking about FACTS and progress
here. Thanks.

"Nan" wrote
I've known several homeschooling families whose children are, imo,
being neglected

And thats none of your business is it Nan?
Pay enough attention to your own kids and you won't have time to notice what
other parents are doing.
sheesh......

Nobodys at home. no kiddin'

"Bob LeChevalier" wrote
It is a false dichotomy, since to some people "indoctrination" IS a
form of education,

shred

BLAAAAAAAAT
You've been dismissed Bob, due to extreme lack of intelligence and overt
indctrination to the socialist cause.
Get a clue, moron.

wrote in message
...
On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 02:49:39 GMT, "Don"
wrote:


wrote in message
. ..
On Wed, 27 Apr 2005 14:00:56 -0400, "George" george@least wrote:


Is the purpose education or indoctrination? The parent with a voucher
can
choose, the parent without cannot.

The "purpose" of what?

Is this what the public schools are producing?
I mean really.

Well gee, Don, the onus is on the poster to CLEARLY communicate.

shred
And you've communicated well, Raquet, that you are incapable of thinking for
yourself and are very jealous of those that do.
Onward.

"Bob LeChevalier" wrote in message
...
"Don" wrote:
"Bob LeChevalier" wrote
Before public
schools, there were only church schools,

Oh yeah?
Prove it.
You are wrong.

Public schools were first promoted by Martin Luther (See the
underlined section):

shred
OK, you were given the opportunity to support your ideal, and you failed.
Next.

"toto" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 02:41:15 GMT, "Don"
wrote:

Is the purpose education or indoctrination? The parent with a voucher
can
choose, the parent without cannot.

Finally a free thinker.
I was wondering if such a thing existed anymore.
They sure are scarce in this group.

Tell me you don't

shred
Dorothy, I am losing patience with you.
If you don't pay attention you will do 5 days of detention.
sigh