Many vouchers also are going to wealthier families, those earning up to $90,000 for a household of four...
Most recipients are not leaving the state’s worst schools: Just 3 percent of new recipients of vouchers in 2015 qualified for them because they lived in the boundaries of F-rated public schools. And while overall private school enrollment grew by 12,000 students over the past five years, the number of voucher recipients grew by 29,000, according to state data, meaning that taxpayer money is potentially helping thousands of families pay for a choice they were already making. Most recipients qualify for free or reduced-price lunches, according to state data, but a growing proportion — now 31 percent — do not...
Stephanie Schaefer of Newburgh, Ind., is a stay-at-home mother of six children, four of whom have used vouchers. For her 13-year-old daughter, Eliana, the opportunity to attend a private school was transformative: After struggling with learning disabilities and falling behind at her highly regarded public school, Eliana was able to catch up, thanks to more-personalized attention at Evansville Christian School. Her progress was a relief for her and her parents.
************************************************* What is the ultimate goal of vouchers? Is it to get kids into better public schools or to allow them to go private (many times religious)? Should states really be subsidizing private school education, escpecially if it is religious? And I ask this as someone who is religious and will be sending DD to religious schools most likely. And with some of the prices of these schools, I would love to get a little relief from the tuition. But I don't necessarily think the state should be subsidizing my choices.
This is the problem with vouchers. It doesn't help the poor; it helps those with moderate incomes who can't afford the full cost of private school, so the poorest kids still go to public schools, only those schools now have less money.
Two of the things that worry me most about vouchers are only briefly mentioned in this article: private schools aren't required to accept every child who wants to attend, or to have highly-qualified faculty. Of particular concern (as someone who's spent a significant portion of my career co-teaching inclusion classes) is that students with learning disabilities and IEPs can either be turned away at the door by private schools that simply don't want to work with children who have special education needs, or that students with learning disabilities who are accepted are then taught by non-certified teachers who may mean very well but who don't have the background to know how to effectively help these kids learn.
It's all well and good to require that private schools receiving public funds administer the same state exams that public schools do, but test scores =/= quality educational opportunity for all students. If the goal of voucher programs is truly to open doors for kids who need better schools, then the schools receiving voucher funds should A: be required to accept and provide services to ALL students just like public schools do, and B: have the same standards for teacher preparation and professional development as their public counterparts.
Post by cookiemdough on Dec 27, 2016 9:56:02 GMT -5
I don't believe in taxpayer money going to subsidize private schools. I think if there is a belief that schools would improve with less oversight and more flexibility for a school to specifically tailor to the needs of students in their district, then they can do that by getting rid of this massive shift towards standardized tests and give public schools the appropriate funds. You can't put a stranglehold on public schools and a one size fits all approach for most kids except those with IEPs and then say "See! They are failing kids in comparison to this tailored education I could get for my child in private school." No. Fix the schools. Otherwise taxpayer dollars will be wasted even more.
Further given the stats you can't convince me this is not another way to further leave behind the poor and minorities and benefit more segregated schools. Why does a $90k household in Indiana need a voucher?
This is the problem with vouchers. It doesn't help the poor; it helps those with moderate incomes who can't afford the full cost of private school, so the poorest kids still go to public schools, only those schools now have less money.
This is my opinion as well. Even if vouchers knock half off private school tuition, you're still looking at $10-15k, which isn't affordable for many families. So vouchers seem to pull wealthier students out of public schools while leaving everyone else to languish there, with less funding and fewer resources than before.
I am a 17 year teacher and I think vouchers are the worst plan.
I also see the concerns about accepting students. I've been at a private school for a while now and we are not equipped to handle kids with serious learning or emotional disabilities. We don't have special ed services. Most of the teachers aren't trained (I'm one of a very few with a teaching certification). It's a problem - we can accept kids knowing we can't really educate them well, or we can turn them away. Neither is a great solution.
"Hello babies. Welcome to Earth. It's hot in the summer and cold in the winter. It's round and wet and crowded. On the outside, babies, you've got a hundred years here. There's only one rule that I know of, babies-"God damn it, you've got to be kind.”
Post by Jalapeñomel on Dec 27, 2016 10:56:50 GMT -5
I agree with the PP who stated that the vouchers are there to help the middle class not the poor.
Public education in Indiana is a travesty. The teachers are paid poorly with subpar benefits, turnover rate is high, and MP doesn't give a shit about education (per my BFF is an assistant principal at a charter school in Indy).
I do not believe that state education funds should be used to send kids to religious schools of any kind.
I have fears that this type of funding would be a slippery slope to get religion and prayer back into the public schools, where it has no place, using the arguments of "well, the state allows vouchers and state education funds to be used for religious schools, so why can't they pray in public school?"
Having gone to a Christian school, I will fight tooth and nail to keep the kind of narrow minded thinking I dealt with out of the education system that is funded by taxpayers. The idea that a child will be taught that "Johnnie is going to hell because he isn't a believer" on tax payer money makes my skin crawl.
Post by jeaniebueller on Dec 27, 2016 11:01:50 GMT -5
Its a roundabout way to get the state to subsidize religious school. That is Betsy Devos's MO and she is from the Bible Belt of Michigan, so that will be her number one goal. Welcome to Trump's America!
I do not believe that state education funds should be used to send kids to religious schools of any kind.
I have fears that this type of funding would be a slippery slope to get religion and prayer back into the public schools, where it has no place, using the arguments of "well, the state allows vouchers and state education funds to be used for religious schools, so why can't they pray in public school?"
Having gone to a Christian school, I will fight tooth and nail to keep the kind of narrow minded thinking I dealt with out of the education system that is funded by taxpayers. The idea that a child will be taught that "Johnnie is going to hell because he isn't a believer" on tax payer money makes my skin crawl.
Not all Christian schools do that, but i get your point regarding separation of church and state.
Public education in Indiana is a travesty. The teachers are paid poorly with subpar benefits, turnover rate is high, and MP doesn't give a shit about education (per my BFF is an assistant principal at a charter school in Indy).
Don't forget the whole "Let's strip the state superintendent of power, because she's a Democrat and doesn't agree with us" thing. *grumble*
What is wrong with a voucher "following the child" as opposed to the funding going to the individual school? This is wrt Title 1.
How has a Title I voucher system been on the table since Reagan and this is the first I have read. Holy Hell.
That to me is significantly worse that just removing some of the school's general federal funding to follow the child. As we've discussed, it's not like some fix costs that are rolled into the per pupil cost of education just go away when a child leaves. Our school is already an F school and a Tile I school. All the gains we have made toward proficiency have been due to our hard working, data driven Tile I program behind us. It has allowed smaller reading classes, extra individualized intervention, and less time spent on 'managed independent learning' centers that were not helping our kids. They needed a skilled adult with them, teaching them.
If we start losing funding per child, that staff will be gone. Payroll is a fixed cost and losing 10 kids to vouchers isn't enough to cut a position (our elementary Title I reading and math department of 2 lit specialists and 10 ed techs servers 100+ kids in 2 schools), but would likely result in cutting positions. Those ed techs are already only working 20 hours per week.
I wish I understood Title I funding better, but I know that like F&R lunch there are a number of other funds tied to how much Title I money you qualify for. I also know that parents were pissed when we didn't get awarded a Title I grant for summer school this last year. We used summer to help kids make catch up growth. Sadly, statistics (and the kids themselves) tell me that their parents voted for 45.
All of the voucher programs I've seen in practice are basically government subsidies for religious schools. The secular private schools are usually way too expensive for voucher holders to afford.
In many parts of the US parochial Catholic schools are loss leaders for their parishes. So the vouchers offset the balance and allow the Catholic education system to continue to function.
In TN one of the voucher programs suggested required the private schools to accept the voucher as payment in full (if they took the vouchers) but obviously they could opt out. I figured the one school I would actually consider if it was an option would choose to opt out because of that.
All of the Catholic schools were fully on board though. Voucher programs have saved some Catholic schools in Indiana - at least for awhile. The one I attended ended up closing but it was due to them owing the archdiocese money from before vouchers when enrollment was ridiculously low.
Vouchers in Indiana have been a boon for struggling private religious schools which I think tells us all we need to know about who they serve.
When doing my research before voting last month, I believe they said the voucher program here in IN was operating at a $30+ million deficit.
I had no idea the income limits on this program was so high! I am really familiar with the article's area and the mom of 6 lives in a very good school district. The private school she's sending her daughter to is about $7k annually.
And I agree that this does not help low income and people who live in failing districts. The parents still have to pay for the schooling and as well as transportation to/from school which is a real barrier to lower income parents.
This was an interesting tidbit: According to data from the state, today more than 60 percent of the voucher students in Indiana are white, and more than half of them have never even attended any public school, much less a failing one. Some of the fastest growth in voucher use has occurred in some of the state's most affluent suburbs. The Center for Tax and Budget Accountability, a Chicago-based think tank, recently concluded that because white children's participation in the voucher program dwarfed the next largest racial group by 44 points, the vouchers were effectively helping to resegregate public schools.
Edit: I thought the original voucher program was only good for students who attended public school for at least a year but I'm guessing Pence got rid of that when he raised the income.
One of the school districts in Colorado had a voucher program that allowed parents to enroll their children in private religious schools. The state Supreme Court found it unconstitutional. This article said they were going to appeal it to the Supreme Court but I don't know that anything happened with it.
I do not believe that state education funds should be used to send kids to religious schools of any kind.
I have fears that this type of funding would be a slippery slope to get religion and prayer back into the public schools, where it has no place, using the arguments of "well, the state allows vouchers and state education funds to be used for religious schools, so why can't they pray in public school?"
Having gone to a Christian school, I will fight tooth and nail to keep the kind of narrow minded thinking I dealt with out of the education system that is funded by taxpayers. The idea that a child will be taught that "Johnnie is going to hell because he isn't a believer" on tax payer money makes my skin crawl.
Not all Christian schools do that, but i get your point regarding separation of church and state.
The fact that ANY do is enough reason why vouchers should not be used for religious schools.
Disclaimer: I am very anti-voucher/schools of choice since it never serves those it is supposed to.
It is bad enough that non-religious charter schools can pick and choose their students, leaving those with learning and discipline issues in their failing schools, and still get state funding here in Michigan.
Michigan has some of the loosest regulations for charter schools and it shows. Waste, allows conflicts of interest, for profit schools, and on and on. This is the system that Betsy "I have no educational background" DeVos has helped to create and shape. If you want to know more about the shit show that is Michigan Charter Schools, here is a good article. www.politico.com/story/2016/12/betsy-devos-michigan-school-experiment-232399
Here are two other articles about schools of choice here in Michigan. Neither paints a positive picture.
@mx, the DC voucher allows for private school? I didn't think it did.
I think so. That was part of the controversy when it first started. When you consider the cost of DC privates, a voucher would not generally cover the cost so it didn't really benefit the kids most in need. It helped those families that could make up he difference. There were also the concerns that it did not address transportation needs that parents would need to consider in using vouchers. Many privates are in the NW corridor and access is restricted by lack of transportation especially, again, by kids most in need.
@mx , the DC voucher allows for private school? I didn't think it did.
I think so. That was part of the controversy when it first started. When you consider the cost of DC privates, a voucher would not generally cover the cost so it didn't really benefit the kids most in need. It helped those families that could make up he difference. There were also the concerns that it did not address transportation needs that parents would need to consider in using vouchers. Many privates are in the NW corridor and access is restricted by lack of transportation especially, again, by kids most in need.
Interesting. When we were considering moving to DC we looked at the voucher program to see how it worked. I don't remember seeing privates on there. But yeah, they are so expensive I don't see how it would really make an impact so it would only be benefitting those who could afford the school anyway and allow them to put more money in their 401K or something.
I hate FL's vouchers with my soul. The difference between our public school system when I attended and now is so stark, and vouchers aren't the only problem, but, in poor areas, they are a HUGE issue. I see the damage it does to kids and communities, and by and large, the private schools are not doing nearly as good of a job as a well funded public school could do.
And I absolutely loathe that tax dollars support this.
Public education in Indiana is a travesty. The teachers are paid poorly with subpar benefits, turnover rate is high, and MP doesn't give a shit about education (per my BFF is an assistant principal at a charter school in Indy).
Don't forget the whole "Let's strip the state superintendent of power, because she's a Democrat and doesn't agree with us" thing. *grumble*
I'm still pissed that she didn't get re-elected. She was never given a chance to make a difference in our school system.
I teach at a school where half the kids in my grade are first or second generation immigrants, many of whom are refugees. Many of our kids get warm coats, hats and gloves through donations. Our funding isn't adequate for our students' needs, and I worry about what would be cut if there was even less funding.
I can't speak for Indiana, but there is a lot more to these "vouchers" than just private schools.
We call them ESAs and in my state, they are largely awarded to kids with special needs, who receive upward to 26k/year.
So first things first -- private schools. It used to be that they could not charge 26k/year because who could afford it? Well now, if you have the right IEP, anyone can afford it! Probably the best business to start right now is a private school geared towards special needs kids.
But second -- home schooling. There are some moms that spend that 26k/year on horse therapy, swim therapy, dance therapy, music therapy. I am not saying those therapies are bad, but at least in my state, there is no oversight to make sure that kids receive education in stuff like math, writing, reading, etc.
And, if you are not special needs but you just want your kid to take swim lessons? Be on a swim team? That is fine, it is PE. As is gymnastics. Ice skating. Dance.
And the rest of the money? Just throw it in your college savings account! DUH. Why should ANY money go to the public school if YOU are not using it?
In my state, you need to spend at 25% of you award. I personally think that you should give back whatever you don't spend. But not these people...they are fighting to get rid of that 25% amount. Because 26k/year is a lot of money and they DESERVE it and NO ONE should be able to tell them how to spend it.
</rant>
Really the largest problem I see is lack of accountability. In public school, if Johnny misses 10 days, the school is aware and can check on him. With these vouchers programs, we lose that and kids drop through the cracks.
There is a subset of kids that do benefit from the program - sometimes special needs kids really do need more than the public school can offer. Sometimes horse therapy is the right thing for the child. But, it comes at the expense of everyone else and like the article says, the poor kids lose the most. As always.
Our Supreme Court currently has an injunction to stall the program but it's in danger of falling apart. Our local teachers union is suddenly showing support for ESAs as long as the new bill meets certain criteria.
I wonder how the voucher people would feel if parents wanted to send their kids to a Muslim private school? I doubt they'd be okay with public money funding private religious schools then.
What is wrong with a voucher "following the child" as opposed to the funding going to the individual school? This is wrt Title 1.
How has a Title I voucher system been on the table since Reagan and this is the first I have read. Holy Hell.
That to me is significantly worse that just removing some of the school's general federal funding to follow the child. As we've discussed, it's not like some fix costs that are rolled into the per pupil cost of education just go away when a child leaves. Our school is already an F school and a Tile I school. All the gains we have made toward proficiency have been due to our hard working, data driven Tile I program behind us. It has allowed smaller reading classes, extra individualized intervention, and less time spent on 'managed independent learning' centers that were not helping our kids. They needed a skilled adult with them, teaching them.
If we start losing funding per child, that staff will be gone. Payroll is a fixed cost and losing 10 kids to vouchers isn't enough to cut a position (our elementary Title I reading and math department of 2 lit specialists and 10 ed techs servers 100+ kids in 2 schools), but would likely result in cutting positions. Those ed techs are already only working 20 hours per week.
I wish I understood Title I funding better, but I know that like F&R lunch there are a number of other funds tied to how much Title I money you qualify for.
I think Ohio has expanded on this. I know that when I was growing up and going to private school our communal Texas Instruments calculators, the smart board, and computers were stamped, "Property of ___ school district" because that district had to share some of its funding with us based upon how many students were enrolled. One of my friends who went to a Catholic school in Columbus said their boxes of chalk and the like went further and said, "Property of ___ school district. Not for use in religious education".
How has a Title I voucher system been on the table since Reagan and this is the first I have read. Holy Hell.
That to me is significantly worse that just removing some of the school's general federal funding to follow the child. As we've discussed, it's not like some fix costs that are rolled into the per pupil cost of education just go away when a child leaves. Our school is already an F school and a Tile I school. All the gains we have made toward proficiency have been due to our hard working, data driven Tile I program behind us. It has allowed smaller reading classes, extra individualized intervention, and less time spent on 'managed independent learning' centers that were not helping our kids. They needed a skilled adult with them, teaching them.
If we start losing funding per child, that staff will be gone. Payroll is a fixed cost and losing 10 kids to vouchers isn't enough to cut a position (our elementary Title I reading and math department of 2 lit specialists and 10 ed techs servers 100+ kids in 2 schools), but would likely result in cutting positions. Those ed techs are already only working 20 hours per week.
I wish I understood Title I funding better, but I know that like F&R lunch there are a number of other funds tied to how much Title I money you qualify for.
I think Ohio has expanded on this. I know that when I was growing up and going to private school our communal Texas Instruments calculators, the smart board, and computers were stamped, "Property of ___ school district" because that district had to share some of its funding with us based upon how many students were enrolled. One of my friends who went to a Catholic school in Columbus said their boxes of chalk and the like went further and said, "Property of ___ school district. Not for use in religious education".
Interesting. My district doesn't have a high school, but there is a private one in town, so we give them X dollars per student to take local kids (local kids have to go there, not like other ME towns where you can choose a HS). I don't think materials are labeled or that they by specific things with the money. Might look into that.
The district is 100% on the hook for students with special needs at the HS. Basically, they let us put them in the basement of one of their buildings. The district hires the staff, pays for materials, does transportation, and our director does all IEP meetings.