Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:i really hate all the talk of "terrible" schools as if the school buildings and staff are the problem. The problem is that the schools are filled with children who live in poverty. Vouchers might help a few kids escape to better schools, but I doubt that new private schools will do any better than charters or DCPS at solving the problems of urban poverty for most.

So much this. What these kids need to succeed are often things that schools can't provide--a stable home, adequate nutrition and healthcare, a safe neighborhood, etc. Good schools in DC are that way primarily because of the background of the kids who go there. A voucher system is a Band-Aid, not a cure.

I posted earlier. The NCES report I referred to upthread shows that DC's voucher program didn't even provide a band-aid. It had no observable impact on academic achievement.

^^^ This defies logic and sounds more like a biased report to achieve a political objective.Below is a link to a Heritage Foundation take on it. I know it's the Heritage Foundation, but I wouldn't swallow the NCES Kool-Aid without a lot of inner reflection on how that could possibly be accurate. Saying a kid would learn more in his or her Ward 8 neighborhood school than at a blue ribbon parochial across town is just ludicrous.

"Voucher programs are a powerful school choice tool that results in many positive outcomes for the students who participate in them. More families should have the opportunity and flexibility to choose the most effective school for their children to achieve success." http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2006/09/are-public-or-private-schools-doing-better-how-the-nces-study-is-being-misinterpreted

Sure, they might be better off at a good parochial school. But there is NO evidence that vouchers would expand the supply of good parochial school seats.

We're pioneering here and making new trails. So there's not going to be any evidence one way or another unless we try. Starting with an expanded pilot program would be useful.

Here's WaPo editorial article on the issue from today:

Trump’s choice for education secretary doesn’t fit into easy categories
http://wapo.st/2gQ0Cc0

Anonymous wrote:I love my neighborhood but the local school is filled with liw income kids of uneducated parents. I would love to use a voucher for my child to attend another public school in the district, where kids actually want to learn and parents care about their education and the school their kids go to. Without having to move, that is.
Ideally there should be schools for kids with different needs a d challenges, with different priorities, philosophy and funding. vouchers or not, but birds of a feather should be given additional opportunity to flock together.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:i really hate all the talk of "terrible" schools as if the school buildings and staff are the problem. The problem is that the schools are filled with children who live in poverty. Vouchers might help a few kids escape to better schools, but I doubt that new private schools will do any better than charters or DCPS at solving the problems of urban poverty for most.

So much this. What these kids need to succeed are often things that schools can't provide--a stable home, adequate nutrition and healthcare, a safe neighborhood, etc. Good schools in DC are that way primarily because of the background of the kids who go there. A voucher system is a Band-Aid, not a cure.

I posted earlier. The NCES report I referred to upthread shows that DC's voucher program didn't even provide a band-aid. It had no observable impact on academic achievement.

^^^ This defies logic and sounds more like a biased report to achieve a political objective.Below is a link to a Heritage Foundation take on it. I know it's the Heritage Foundation, but I wouldn't swallow the NCES Kool-Aid without a lot of inner reflection on how that could possibly be accurate. Saying a kid would learn more in his or her Ward 8 neighborhood school than at a blue ribbon parochial across town is just ludicrous.

"Voucher programs are a powerful school choice tool that results in many positive outcomes for the students who participate in them. More families should have the opportunity and flexibility to choose the most effective school for their children to achieve success." http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2006/09/are-public-or-private-schools-doing-better-how-the-nces-study-is-being-misinterpreted

Sure, they might be better off at a good parochial school. But there is NO evidence that vouchers would expand the supply of good parochial school seats.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:i really hate all the talk of "terrible" schools as if the school buildings and staff are the problem. The problem is that the schools are filled with children who live in poverty. Vouchers might help a few kids escape to better schools, but I doubt that new private schools will do any better than charters or DCPS at solving the problems of urban poverty for most.

So much this. What these kids need to succeed are often things that schools can't provide--a stable home, adequate nutrition and healthcare, a safe neighborhood, etc. Good schools in DC are that way primarily because of the background of the kids who go there. A voucher system is a Band-Aid, not a cure.

I posted earlier. The NCES report I referred to upthread shows that DC's voucher program didn't even provide a band-aid. It had no observable impact on academic achievement.

^^^ This defies logic and sounds more like a biased report to achieve a political objective.Below is a link to a Heritage Foundation take on it. I know it's the Heritage Foundation, but I wouldn't swallow the NCES Kool-Aid without a lot of inner reflection on how that could possibly be accurate. Saying a kid would learn more in his or her Ward 8 neighborhood school than at a blue ribbon parochial across town is just ludicrous.

"Voucher programs are a powerful school choice tool that results in many positive outcomes for the students who participate in them. More families should have the opportunity and flexibility to choose the most effective school for their children to achieve success." http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2006/09/are-public-or-private-schools-doing-better-how-the-nces-study-is-being-misinterpreted

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:i really hate all the talk of "terrible" schools as if the school buildings and staff are the problem. The problem is that the schools are filled with children who live in poverty. Vouchers might help a few kids escape to better schools, but I doubt that new private schools will do any better than charters or DCPS at solving the problems of urban poverty for most.

So much this. What these kids need to succeed are often things that schools can't provide--a stable home, adequate nutrition and healthcare, a safe neighborhood, etc. Good schools in DC are that way primarily because of the background of the kids who go there. A voucher system is a Band-Aid, not a cure.

I posted earlier. The NCES report I referred to upthread shows that DC's voucher program didn't even provide a band-aid. It had no observable impact on academic achievement.

^^^ This defies logic and sounds more like a biased report to achieve a political objective.Below is a link to a Heritage Foundation take on it. I know it's the Heritage Foundation, but I wouldn't swallow the NCES Kool-Aid without a lot of inner reflection on how that could possibly be accurate. Saying a kid would learn more in his or her Ward 8 neighborhood school than at a blue ribbon parochial across town is just ludicrous.

"Voucher programs are a powerful school choice tool that results in many positive outcomes for the students who participate in them. More families should have the opportunity and flexibility to choose the most effective school for their children to achieve success." http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2006/09/are-public-or-private-schools-doing-better-how-the-nces-study-is-being-misinterpreted

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:i really hate all the talk of "terrible" schools as if the school buildings and staff are the problem. The problem is that the schools are filled with children who live in poverty. Vouchers might help a few kids escape to better schools, but I doubt that new private schools will do any better than charters or DCPS at solving the problems of urban poverty for most.

So much this. What these kids need to succeed are often things that schools can't provide--a stable home, adequate nutrition and healthcare, a safe neighborhood, etc. Good schools in DC are that way primarily because of the background of the kids who go there. A voucher system is a Band-Aid, not a cure.

I posted earlier. The NCES report I referred to upthread shows that DC's voucher program didn't even provide a band-aid. It had no observable impact on academic achievement.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But the Trump transition people, DeVos and some in Congress want to take a portion of the federal education budget and fund MORE vouchers that woudl be available to anyone, regardless of income.

That's definitely now how DC's current program works. The funds are in addition to the amount DC gets for all its public schools, and eligiblity is based on income.

What they are hoping to do would be much more disruptive to DCPS and the charters and the details are important to follow.

On average, federal dollars account for 10% of a school district's total funding. The rest is covered by state and local sources. Of that 10%, almost all of it is funneled to schools for use by specific populations such as special education students, ESL students, and students living in poverty (i.e., Title I). The ESEA was just reauthorized last year. There is zero percent chance that congress will overhaul that bill to redirect funding to the general population. Now what congress COULD do, is decide to take ESL, SPED and Title I funding and mandate that it be used to provide vouchers for those targeted populations.

Congress could also pass a bill authorizing a second pot of money (i.e. totally new funds) that could be distributed through a federal voucher program. However, what is the overall likelihood of our current congress boosting federal education spending by billions and billions of dollars?

What congress and the president CAN'T do is require that states use their own state and local funding on a voucher program. Of course, states that are interested in creating their own state-funded voucher program are free to do s. In fact, many states have done either that or provided a tuition tax credit. You can be assured, however, that DC will not be passing any legislation offering locally-funded vouchers to the average MC family.

It is all the more pertinent that DC is not a state and its budget is the whimsical playtoy of the president and congress.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:i really hate all the talk of "terrible" schools as if the school buildings and staff are the problem. The problem is that the schools are filled with children who live in poverty. Vouchers might help a few kids escape to better schools, but I doubt that new private schools will do any better than charters or DCPS at solving the problems of urban poverty for most.

So much this. What these kids need to succeed are often things that schools can't provide--a stable home, adequate nutrition and healthcare, a safe neighborhood, etc. Good schools in DC are that way primarily because of the background of the kids who go there. A voucher system is a Band-Aid, not a cure.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But the Trump transition people, DeVos and some in Congress want to take a portion of the federal education budget and fund MORE vouchers that woudl be available to anyone, regardless of income.

That's definitely now how DC's current program works. The funds are in addition to the amount DC gets for all its public schools, and eligiblity is based on income.

What they are hoping to do would be much more disruptive to DCPS and the charters and the details are important to follow.

On average, federal dollars account for 10% of a school district's total funding. The rest is covered by state and local sources. Of that 10%, almost all of it is funneled to schools for use by specific populations such as special education students, ESL students, and students living in poverty (i.e., Title I). The ESEA was just reauthorized last year. There is zero percent chance that congress will overhaul that bill to redirect funding to the general population. Now what congress COULD do, is decide to take ESL, SPED and Title I funding and mandate that it be used to provide vouchers for those targeted populations.

Congress could also pass a bill authorizing a second pot of money (i.e. totally new funds) that could be distributed through a federal voucher program. However, what is the overall likelihood of our current congress boosting federal education spending by billions and billions of dollars?

What congress and the president CAN'T do is require that states use their own state and local funding on a voucher program. Of course, states that are interested in creating their own state-funded voucher program are free to do s. In fact, many states have done either that or provided a tuition tax credit. You can be assured, however, that DC will not be passing any legislation offering locally-funded vouchers to the average MC family.

Very useful post - thanks, PP. Question: Can the Feds tie any of the funding (Title 1, etc.) you mentioned to a voucher requirement such that a state would not receive the funding if it doesn't use the money as the Feds wish? Thanks.

That's what they do currently in DC. Not sure how it would work for the rest of the country. There is a line of constitutional case law on the Spending Power about when tying federal funding to state actions becomes coercive, but that's generally a very hard standard to show. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Dakota_v._Dole

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But the Trump transition people, DeVos and some in Congress want to take a portion of the federal education budget and fund MORE vouchers that woudl be available to anyone, regardless of income.

That's definitely now how DC's current program works. The funds are in addition to the amount DC gets for all its public schools, and eligiblity is based on income.

What they are hoping to do would be much more disruptive to DCPS and the charters and the details are important to follow.

On average, federal dollars account for 10% of a school district's total funding. The rest is covered by state and local sources. Of that 10%, almost all of it is funneled to schools for use by specific populations such as special education students, ESL students, and students living in poverty (i.e., Title I). The ESEA was just reauthorized last year. There is zero percent chance that congress will overhaul that bill to redirect funding to the general population. Now what congress COULD do, is decide to take ESL, SPED and Title I funding and mandate that it be used to provide vouchers for those targeted populations.

Congress could also pass a bill authorizing a second pot of money (i.e. totally new funds) that could be distributed through a federal voucher program. However, what is the overall likelihood of our current congress boosting federal education spending by billions and billions of dollars?

What congress and the president CAN'T do is require that states use their own state and local funding on a voucher program. Of course, states that are interested in creating their own state-funded voucher program are free to do s. In fact, many states have done either that or provided a tuition tax credit. You can be assured, however, that DC will not be passing any legislation offering locally-funded vouchers to the average MC family.

Very useful post - thanks, PP. Question: Can the Feds tie any of the funding (Title 1, etc.) you mentioned to a voucher requirement such that a state would not receive the funding if it doesn't use the money as the Feds wish? Thanks.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But the Trump transition people, DeVos and some in Congress want to take a portion of the federal education budget and fund MORE vouchers that woudl be available to anyone, regardless of income.

That's definitely now how DC's current program works. The funds are in addition to the amount DC gets for all its public schools, and eligiblity is based on income.

What they are hoping to do would be much more disruptive to DCPS and the charters and the details are important to follow.

On average, federal dollars account for 10% of a school district's total funding. The rest is covered by state and local sources. Of that 10%, almost all of it is funneled to schools for use by specific populations such as special education students, ESL students, and students living in poverty (i.e., Title I). The ESEA was just reauthorized last year. There is zero percent chance that congress will overhaul that bill to redirect funding to the general population. Now what congress COULD do, is decide to take ESL, SPED and Title I funding and mandate that it be used to provide vouchers for those targeted populations.

Congress could also pass a bill authorizing a second pot of money (i.e. totally new funds) that could be distributed through a federal voucher program. However, what is the overall likelihood of our current congress boosting federal education spending by billions and billions of dollars?

What congress and the president CAN'T do is require that states use their own state and local funding on a voucher program. Of course, states that are interested in creating their own state-funded voucher program are free to do s. In fact, many states have done either that or provided a tuition tax credit. You can be assured, however, that DC will not be passing any legislation offering locally-funded vouchers to the average MC family.

Anonymous wrote:i really hate all the talk of "terrible" schools as if the school buildings and staff are the problem. The problem is that the schools are filled with children who live in poverty. Vouchers might help a few kids escape to better schools, but I doubt that new private schools will do any better than charters or DCPS at solving the problems of urban poverty for most.