Reader comments
Voters, approve vouchers in November
28 comments | Read story
Get today's headlines via email
Afternoon edition
Deseret News Family Deals
In Opinion
Across Site
- Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb: The...
- Readers' forum: A changing Constitution
- Michael Gerson: Egypt's craziness is...
- George F. Will: Is it bribery or just...
- Mackenzie Eaglen: Obama's proposed...
- My view: The climate is right to tear...
- Readers' forum: Incorporate Millcreek
- Charles Krauthammer: The Gospel...
- Readers' forum: Teachers came first
- In our opinion: Editorial: Protecting...
In Opinion
Across Site
- In our opinion: Editorial: Protecting...
- Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb: The...
- Charles Krauthammer: The Gospel...
- Evangelicals and Mormons: Can we talk?
- Readers' forum: A changing Constitution
- My view: The climate is right to tear...
- George F. Will: Is it bribery or just...
- Mackenzie Eaglen: Obama's proposed...
- Readers' forum: Rights of conscience
- In our opinion: Tinkering with...
In Opinion
Across Site
- Obama's assault on the poor
62 - Evangelicals and Mormons: Can we talk?
53 - Letters: Bush's failed policies
52 - Letters: A changing Constitution
31 - Letters: Teachers not overpaid
30 - Letters: Home equity loans
28 - Economic chaos ahead
25 - Letters: Rights of conscience
25 - GOP no longer leads on defense
24 - Editorial: Rights of conscience
23







Public education needs a lot of adjustment for sure. Less tinkering by the test-em-till-they-bleed crowd. Better pay for good teachers. No pay for bad ones. But it's foolish to believe that public education will be somehow improved by the bogus competition of voucher-supported schools.
Which one is "educational welfare"? Public education where everyone has the same opportunity; or lining up at the government trough for a voucher check that subsidizes your personal choice?
Voucher accepting private schools can choose their studentbody--accepting only the best and brightest (cheapest to educate) and thus leaving, in the public schools, those who required special services (most expensive to educate). Voucher accepting private schools have no accountability written into this bill (unless you count an audit after FIVE years), and therefore won't have to follow the unfunded and partially funded state and federal educational mandates. Voucher accepting private schools don't have to follow the very expensive teaching and testing mandates of No Child Left Behind. Voucher accepting private schools can (according to a section of this bill) have parents sign away their rights to Special Education services (an Individual Education Plan or IEP) which is probably the most expensive, and unfunded, factor in public education. Voucher accepting private schools aren't required to provide counseling, limited English, bilingual, emotionally damaged, semi lock down, "alternative", or young mothers educational services that the public schools are required to provide. The thing most people like LaVarr forget is that all students are not equal when it comes to funding. Those requiring special services are VERY expensive to educate!
LaVarr, the only point you make that I MIGHT have to concede is the lowering of class size. However, the jury is still out on that one. When the first three Charter Schools opened in my area, the regular public schools were promised by Morley, Bramble, Ferrin, etc. what a wonderful thing this would be for "lowering the class sizes in the regular public schools." Well, here we are 3 years later and my average class size has gone from 36 to 39 students. So much for promises.
Now, LaVarr, just how does a voucher save money for the public school? You haven't been sneaking into Investigations Math have you?
But if approximately 15 or more students leave the school, the school district does not have the money generated by the student count so the teaching staff is reduced. Smaller classes will not happen.
Teacher staffing is determined by the number of students. This provoucher argument of smaller classes is bogus and not based on reality at all.
I do however oppose paying $109 to the South Davis Recreation Center. I am all for choice in our recreation activities. I pay a yearly fee to belong to a private pool because as a parent, I have decided I want better for my children than a public swimming pool has to offer. I hereby request the state provide me with a voucher to help pay the cost of sending my family to a private pool. Just think of the benefits. There will be less crowding at the public pool, there will be a lower life guard to swimmer ratio at the public pool, and just think of the extra parking space. The savings to the state abound.
One last point, public education is not just about educating your kids, it's about having an educated society, the very backbone of a functioning democracy. Those who accept vouchers and turn their backs on publically funded education should sign an agreement that they will never go to a doctor, dentist, lawyer, etc. who attended a public school. The point is, we all benefit from educating children. People who send their children to private school should not get public funds just because they don't have children in the public system. Plenty of people with no children pay into the system and they have no children to benefit from it. Everyone benefits from having an education populous.
You are right on.
When my daughter was in kindergarten, there where 60 students spread among 3 classes, or 20 students per class. The next year, the charter school opened, and the neighborhood school lost 2 children in that grade. Those two kids meant that 3 classes could no longer be justified. The result was 58 kids spread among 2 teachers for a class size of 29 students. Good thing we had the charter school to help reduce class sizes at the neighborhood school!
Having a couple of students per grade leave the system does not automatically translate into a smaller class size.
That is what vouchers do to public schools. It creams off the cheapest, easiest-to-educate students and leaves the rest for the public schools. That doesn't leave more money for public ed. It makes public ed. statistics look more expensive.
Whatever money it initially "saves" will not go to schools. It will just make it easier for legislators to spend it elsewhere or give tax cuts. No real friend of public ed. will support vouchers.
It won't create competition because the public schools CAN"T change with all the laws around their necks.
For that matter, no real friend of private schools will support vouchers either, because it will eventually tie the private schools down with the same restrictions that are on the public schools.
Vouchers are a lose-lose proposition for all except those wanting a hand-out at tax-payer expense!
This is a load of crap and so are vouchers.
When I was a new parent I put much effort into getting my child ready for school.
When he eventually went he was ahead of everyone else.
This resulted in him spending a great deal of time doing and learning nothing.
Being bright and bored he started to act up. Then he was punished for this.
He eventually learned to hate school.
There seems to be all kinds of programs for the slow kids but very little for the bright ones.
And one other thing: the argument for choice is one based on evidence of success as well as some very basic economic fact ( i.e., competition makes everything better and cheaper.) But so many of you voucher opponents go on and on about fixed costs and expensive students, yada yada yada. The crux of the matter is IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF EDUCATION. That takes change. Change is hard. But it is needed, and worth it.
Webb is right on. Go vouchers, everybody wins (except lousy teachers and decrepit bureaucrats)