Protest Hogan's diversion of public funds from public schools into private schools

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I believe in the freedom of school choice.
Why don't you, op?

It's only freedom of choice for some. But, while Trump is busy attempting to weaken the independent media, by all means, he should go ahead and weaken public education. Both are essential to democracy.

Public education is already weak, IMO.

We spend tons of money on education in this country and it gets wasted on stupid shit like Chromebooks in 2nd grade so kids can learn how to message each other, Promethean boards that don't work properly some of the time, additional testing year after year for no good reason.

What are you so afraid of? Try something different.

NP. Agree with everything you said, except the last part. What I am afraid of is the old bait and switch. Divert funds from public schools to private schools, then when public schools are no longer viable, make education a pay to learn system. no money, no education. no public funding of education of any kind. The people promoting "school choice" are those who believe nothing should be free. Their motives are never altruistic and all they care about is creating spaces for businesses to make profit -- it's never about people in need. Don't ever be fooled and don't try to fool those who know this is all driven by profit motive.

Although I support school vouchers, I also agree with this poster. Remember Bannon wants to "blow it all up."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Be careful. They make the same arguments now. Families don't live in apartments! Developers don't need to fund schools! Millennials won't have many kids!

"They" who? Who is actually saying that families don't live in apartments, developers don't need to fund schools, and millennials won't have many kids? (By the way, do you have any data on how many kids millennials are having?) I follow planning in Montgomery County pretty closely, and I have never actually heard or read anybody official saying any of those things, though I have heard and read many assertions that they do.

[Anonymous]

Unfortunately the public school system is just another bureaucracy and consequently is wasteful with funds. The only way to get them in check is to create a competitive environment. The schools that perform will get the funds. That is the key to improving education in this country. We are not wealthy, but we spend the money to send our kids to parochial schools for obvious reasons. Why should I pay taxes and tuition. It is not an equitable situation. Give the $$ to people and let them decide where to spend it!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Unfortunately the public school system is just another bureaucracy and consequently is wasteful with funds. The only way to get them in check is to create a competitive environment. The schools that perform will get the funds. That is the key to improving education in this country. We are not wealthy, but we spend the money to send our kids to parochial schools for obvious reasons. Why should I pay taxes and tuition. It is not an equitable situation. Give the $$ to people and let them decide where to spend it!!

You pay taxes for schools your kids don't attend for the same reason that I pay taxes for roads I don't use. Namely, that taxes are not user fees.

By the way, could you please name two wealthy countries whose public education system is based on a model of competition among schools?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you don't go along with vouchers.. Upper middle class people are going to move out of your district to places that do. You cannot avoid competition and responsible people are going to immediately do what is good for their children. The public schools are going to be repositories for completely irresponsible and dysfunctional families.

Upper middle class people are not eligible for vouchers. Why would they move?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


Generally these programs are for kids whose needs are not being met in public. Would you rather pay the societal costs later or invest now?

Generally? We are not talking here about public school systems paying private schools for students with disabilities, for whom the public school system is unable to provide a free and appropriate education. We are talking about vouchers for parents to use public money to pay private schools.

Exactly. I'm the pp. There are many kids whose needs are not being met in public school, and it's not because of disabilities. Go read the independent school forum or visit some of the area privates. MCPS uses a cookie cutter, or as some say "factory model" of education. Many kids need project-based learning, or less disruptive classrooms, or a school with lots of breaks for physical activity. Why limit that option to just the wealthy? All our kids deserve an education that motivates them. Privates grant financial aid, but these schools will benefit from additional government funds. Many of the kids in MD go to Catholic, Jewish, or Muslim schools (per the Baltimore Sun article posted upstream). These schools teach values; they use a virtues-based curriculum, which ironically was developed by a former MCPS "teacher of the year" who couldn't get MCPS to adopt this system. Kids from difficult backgrounds need very nurturing schools. Many public schools are so overcrowded and the teachers are so overwhelmed with bureaucracy and heterogeneous classrooms (see above thread from teachers) that they just can't reach these kids as well as small privates. The vouchers give these kids another chance, and the parents work hard to support their kids. By the way, have you asked where your public school teachers send their kids to school? I was surprised to learn how many MCPS teachers send their own kids to private schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


Generally these programs are for kids whose needs are not being met in public. Would you rather pay the societal costs later or invest now?

Generally? We are not talking here about public school systems paying private schools for students with disabilities, for whom the public school system is unable to provide a free and appropriate education. We are talking about vouchers for parents to use public money to pay private schools.

Exactly. I'm the pp. There are many kids whose needs are not being met in public school, and it's not because of disabilities. Go read the independent school forum or visit some of the area privates. MCPS uses a cookie cutter, or as some say "factory model" of education. Many kids need project-based learning, or less disruptive classrooms, or a school with lots of breaks for physical activity. Why limit that option to just the wealthy? All our kids deserve an education that motivates them. Privates grant financial aid, but these schools will benefit from additional government funds. Many of the kids in MD go to Catholic, Jewish, or Muslim schools (per the Baltimore Sun article posted upstream). These schools teach values; they use a virtues-based curriculum, which ironically was developed by a former MCPS "teacher of the year" who couldn't get MCPS to adopt this system. Kids from difficult backgrounds need very nurturing schools. Many public schools are so overcrowded and the teachers are so overwhelmed with bureaucracy and heterogeneous classrooms (see above thread from teachers) that they just can't reach these kids as well as small privates. The vouchers give these kids another chance, and the parents work hard to support their kids. By the way, have you asked where your public school teachers send their kids to school? I was surprised to learn how many MCPS teachers send their own kids to private schools.

If there are many kids whose needs are not being met in public school, then the solution is to improve the public school system. The solution is not to spend tax dollars to send kids to private school, because we already know that doesn't work. (And, in the case of tax dollars for religious schools, it's also counter to the First Amendment.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Exactly. I'm the pp. There are many kids whose needs are not being met in public school, and it's not because of disabilities. Go read the independent school forum or visit some of the area privates. MCPS uses a cookie cutter, or as some say "factory model" of education. Many kids need project-based learning, or less disruptive classrooms, or a school with lots of breaks for physical activity. Why limit that option to just the wealthy? All our kids deserve an education that motivates them. Privates grant financial aid, but these schools will benefit from additional government funds. Many of the kids in MD go to Catholic, Jewish, or Muslim schools (per the Baltimore Sun article posted upstream). These schools teach values; they use a virtues-based curriculum, which ironically was developed by a former MCPS "teacher of the year" who couldn't get MCPS to adopt this system. Kids from difficult backgrounds need very nurturing schools. Many public schools are so overcrowded and the teachers are so overwhelmed with bureaucracy and heterogeneous classrooms (see above thread from teachers) that they just can't reach these kids as well as small privates. The vouchers give these kids another chance, and the parents work hard to support their kids. By the way, have you asked where your public school teachers send their kids to school? I was surprised to learn how many MCPS teachers send their own kids to private schools.

I can never decide whether I'm amused or outraged by the idea that public schools don't teach values. Probably both.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

These studies are questionable. First, if you limit Boost funds to be applied to schools charging only $14k as Boost does, you are self-selecting schools that are not well-funded. Contrast that to DC's Opportunity Scholarship, which grants modest sums for kids to study at most privates in DC - including those with tuition above $30k or $40k. Second, privates don't teach to the test - they don't prep kids for standardized tests for days on end, as my kids' public school did. There are studies that show black males from voucher-funded privates in NYC are more likely to attend college.

Post a link to that study, please?

And then please explain why that one study is good, while three consecutive reports, each studying one of the largest new state voucher programs, each finding that vouchers hurt student learning, are bad.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/23/upshot/dismal-results-from-vouchers-surprise-researchers-as-devos-era-begins.html?_r=0

(And honestly, I'm just not interested in the "it's because privates don't teach to the test, whereas public schools do nothing but test prep" excuse.)

Pp here. I was responding to the link upstream about a study of Louisiana schools. A poster read it selectively and made the claim that vouchers don't work. If you read the link posted, you'll see the researchers recommended that vouchers be applied to schools with higher tuitions as they might be better resourced to meet students' needs. The NYC results are easily googled - it was a Wall St. Journal study. . Sorry, I can't post links easily on my mobile.

I don't have time now to read the other studies, but I will and post back. My observations are from nine years as a parent in MCPS, three years in religious private schools, and my own time volunteering in DCPS.

BTW, I am a Democrat who protested DeVos' nomination. That doesn't mean that some small scale experimentation with vouchers shouldn't be tried - but they need to be used in good schools, not just small, inexpensive privates, like BOOST is targeting. DC's program is much better - The Bishop Walker School in SE, St. Alban's, Sidwell and most other privates participate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Exactly. I'm the pp. There are many kids whose needs are not being met in public school, and it's not because of disabilities. Go read the independent school forum or visit some of the area privates. MCPS uses a cookie cutter, or as some say "factory model" of education. Many kids need project-based learning, or less disruptive classrooms, or a school with lots of breaks for physical activity. Why limit that option to just the wealthy? All our kids deserve an education that motivates them. Privates grant financial aid, but these schools will benefit from additional government funds. Many of the kids in MD go to Catholic, Jewish, or Muslim schools (per the Baltimore Sun article posted upstream). These schools teach values; they use a virtues-based curriculum, which ironically was developed by a former MCPS "teacher of the year" who couldn't get MCPS to adopt this system. Kids from difficult backgrounds need very nurturing schools. Many public schools are so overcrowded and the teachers are so overwhelmed with bureaucracy and heterogeneous classrooms (see above thread from teachers) that they just can't reach these kids as well as small privates. The vouchers give these kids another chance, and the parents work hard to support their kids. By the way, have you asked where your public school teachers send their kids to school? I was surprised to learn how many MCPS teachers send their own kids to private schools.

I can never decide whether I'm amused or outraged by the idea that public schools don't teach values. Probably both.

Yes, I saw the posters in the classrooms and halls with the school's mission statement; I know the well-intended teachers try. But my kids' experience was that misbehavior was rarely addressed, except in the most egregious situations. They can teach, but they can't or won't discipline. I had public school teachers asking for my help in dealing with unruly kids. We got one situation addressed after many months of meetings and lawsuit threats from some of the well-heeled dads. At my kid's private high school, tardiness = automatic Saturday 6AM detention. They don't let things spiral out of control.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Be careful. They make the same arguments now. Families don't live in apartments! Developers don't need to fund schools! Millennials won't have many kids!

"They" who? Who is actually saying that families don't live in apartments, developers don't need to fund schools, and millennials won't have many kids? (By the way, do you have any data on how many kids millennials are having?) I follow planning in Montgomery County pretty closely, and I have never actually heard or read anybody official saying any of those things, though I have heard and read many assertions that they do.

It's hard to follow. Bruce Crespell, who recently left MCPS, was Head of Planning. He made these statements. Then the MCPS piss-poor projections are passed on to County Planning and they follow the numbers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Pp here. I was responding to the link upstream about a study of Louisiana schools. A poster read it selectively and made the claim that vouchers don't work. If you read the link posted, you'll see the researchers recommended that vouchers be applied to schools with higher tuitions as they might be better resourced to meet students' needs. The NYC results are easily googled - it was a Wall St. Journal study. . Sorry, I can't post links easily on my mobile.

I don't have time now to read the other studies, but I will and post back. My observations are from nine years as a parent in MCPS, three years in religious private schools, and my own time volunteering in DCPS.

BTW, I am a Democrat who protested DeVos' nomination. That doesn't mean that some small scale experimentation with vouchers shouldn't be tried - but they need to be used in good schools, not just small, inexpensive privates, like BOOST is targeting. DC's program is much better - The Bishop Walker School in SE, St. Alban's, Sidwell and most other privates participate.

If Sidwell and St. Alban's want to provide an education to poor kids whose needs aren't being met in the public schools, they can do that without tax dollars. Also, I wonder how many poor kids whose needs aren't being met can be accommodated by Sidwell and St. Alban's?

The fact is that any voucher program will primarily involve inexpensive private schools, not Sidwell and St. Alban's, because that's what there is. Even in DC, where the vouchers were for $7,500 and where there are lots of fancy expensive private schools, only 14% of students through 2009 attended schools with a tuition higher than the voucher.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Be careful. They make the same arguments now. Families don't live in apartments! Developers don't need to fund schools! Millennials won't have many kids!

"They" who? Who is actually saying that families don't live in apartments, developers don't need to fund schools, and millennials won't have many kids? (By the way, do you have any data on how many kids millennials are having?) I follow planning in Montgomery County pretty closely, and I have never actually heard or read anybody official saying any of those things, though I have heard and read many assertions that they do.

It's hard to follow. Bruce Crespell, who recently left MCPS, was Head of Planning. He made these statements. Then the MCPS piss-poor projections are passed on to County Planning and they follow the numbers.

Where, when, and what documentation do you have for it? Given that he provided data on numbers of students in MCPS who live in apartments, it seems very hard to believe that he would ever say that families don't live in apartments.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Exactly. I'm the pp. There are many kids whose needs are not being met in public school, and it's not because of disabilities. Go read the independent school forum or visit some of the area privates. MCPS uses a cookie cutter, or as some say "factory model" of education. Many kids need project-based learning, or less disruptive classrooms, or a school with lots of breaks for physical activity. Why limit that option to just the wealthy? All our kids deserve an education that motivates them. Privates grant financial aid, but these schools will benefit from additional government funds. Many of the kids in MD go to Catholic, Jewish, or Muslim schools (per the Baltimore Sun article posted upstream). These schools teach values; they use a virtues-based curriculum, which ironically was developed by a former MCPS "teacher of the year" who couldn't get MCPS to adopt this system. Kids from difficult backgrounds need very nurturing schools. Many public schools are so overcrowded and the teachers are so overwhelmed with bureaucracy and heterogeneous classrooms (see above thread from teachers) that they just can't reach these kids as well as small privates. The vouchers give these kids another chance, and the parents work hard to support their kids. By the way, have you asked where your public school teachers send their kids to school? I was surprised to learn how many MCPS teachers send their own kids to private schools.

I can never decide whether I'm amused or outraged by the idea that public schools don't teach values. Probably both.

Yes, I saw the posters in the classrooms and halls with the school's mission statement; I know the well-intended teachers try. But my kids' experience was that misbehavior was rarely addressed, except in the most egregious situations. They can teach, but they can't or won't discipline. I had public school teachers asking for my help in dealing with unruly kids. We got one situation addressed after many months of meetings and lawsuit threats from some of the well-heeled dads. At my kid's private high school, tardiness = automatic Saturday 6AM detention. They don't let things spiral out of control.

Ah. So when you say "teach values", what you mean is

1. can select students
2. can expel students

[Anonymous]

Poor people can't afford to make up the tuition difference and Sidwell and St Albans have plenty of applicants who can fully self-pay w/o tuition assistance.

This is why vouchers are not going to work for the people they are mainly intended for. This is why many middle-class families object. Middle class = too much income for vouchers, but not enough money to afford private.