Of course I was kidding, but I am shocked that there are 67 countries whose primary language is English - I was imaging it was closer to 15-20. Sorry for he derail over a stupid joke.

If the US went to vouchers what you are likely to see is a bunch of companies running schools that work their asses off trying to recruit parents/kids to their schools.

There are likely to be schools out there that will compete for the behavior challenging kids as well. Remember we are talking about guaranteed gov't checks every year as long as the kids/parents can keep the kids in school. If you think these behavior challenging kids are unattractive think about how there are some renters who are super unattractive, but they are section 8 housing so home owners are still willing to fix up a house enough to attract these types of renters because they come with the gov't guaranteed checks.

There will also likely be some kind of standardized test that will be required and each school will have to publish how their kids did. There will also likely be some kind of gov't rule that if a school tests below x% mark that the vouchers they will give those kids is only 75% (making up numbers for the sake of argument) of the voucher they will give those parents if they went to a school above that x% test mark.

Over-achieving kids will be requited even harder than normal kids in the same way colleges currently recruit them - scholarships, smaller classrooms, better facilities, pizza for lunch everyday, etc.

I'm not sure what all lucium has said about teacher unions, but I think they are a net drag on education - as is tenure in college professors.

the right wants it so bad because 1) the idea of the private sector doing stuff better than the public sector is a core tenet of the right-wing moral framework and when we can prove it (like we can with schools) we win morally on all other topics as well (Ie the public will be less in favor of public health care, if we win on private education), and 2) because public education right now is a core democrat power center so anything that weakens it is better for the nation definitionally.

2) is why a lot of people get that charter schools are better as an option but are against them, you can't give a win to the other side even with truth and reason are entirely on the other side, because it actually means a material loss on other stuff you care about.

so it's about do you actually care about fixing education a little and improving outcomes for students, saving money in the process, admitting that the public isn't necessarily better at serving the needs of human beings than the private sector even in core functions, or do you care more for democrats to win elections more often and you are willing to sacrifice students to that cause?

charter schools already exist in 45 states.

12 states have vouchers state-wide, 29 have at least a district with vouchers

In this brave new world, how would charter schools be measured, and would they be measured equally across the board? Who would oversee this?

Who decides curriculum?

My quick googling tells me that Florida has vouchers, but they don't pay the entire expense of most schools which leaves out the poor entirely.

Florida has a voucher at 8k, compared to approx 10k per pupil in public schools.

not sure why that doesn't pay for the entire expense in most schools, poor people with kids don't live in the most expensive areas usually

meh, see you lose me on this gibberish talk.

states can decide how much to control recipients of public money, as per any other public money expenditure which gets supply from the private sector.

"who measures private sector construction companies when the public finances infrastructure" isn't a question that leads you to have public sector construction companies right?

every state will have it's sensibilities about how much command and control they want to have wrt recipients of public money, and btw the same is true for public schools. some states give local districts more decision space and viceversa

you asked why the right is behind it, I answered truthfully.

cant speak on every city, but in boston you have two major exam schools. boston latin and boston latin academy. up until recently entrance was granted via a combination of grades achieved and scores attained on entrance exams.

of course this had to be adjusted to include race, because well, boston gonna boston.

https://www.wbur.org/news/2021/07/15...issions-policy

i don't think our education system is bad, on the whole, just our public schools, specifically inner city.

i personally think the way schooling is done should be overhauled. if a child can't behave in school, they most likely won't behave in society. i can speak from personal experience on this one as once puberty hit i became a nuisance to all those around me trying to get an actual education. i wasted three years in an exam school where my seat could have went to a perhaps less brighter student, but one who was actually going to pay attention.

trouble students, those given multiple chances and refusing to change, should have their education path altered and entered into a more rigid environment, one more military like. instead of learning algebra, these kids should learn consequences of their actions. they should learn valuable trades and/or be put on paths for military service. basically, a hail-mary approach to save them from themselves. i would have been much better off gaining discipline rather than knowledge, as knowledge can always be achieved later in life.

of course, this will not happen as the socioeconomic breakdown of said schooling would have lefties screaming racism, despite it being better for society on the whole.

as for non-troubled students, once high school hits there should be a split based on testing. bright students are grouped together and less bright grouped together.

They should gamify it. Do well on tests, get paid. Do poorly, take a beating.

Sadly only someone like Bukele would have the courage to implement such a system.

I've seen the books for 3 Milwaukee charter schools, and none of them received anything close to what the per-pupil spending at MPS is. None of them were allowed to ask families for additional money beyond standard extras like field trips or whatever optional activities kids wanted to do.

The private school I sent my kids to was less than half the cost of what MPS spends on a single child, but was also partially supported by the church, as it was a Lutheran K-8 school.

Very very few choice/charter schools are on the level of a Brookfield Academy or whatever your local equivalent of a rich kid's school is.

We'll give your kids a good education on the cheap as long as we can brainwash them about Adam and Eve and the winged elephants. So is that the Faustian bargain (see what I did there?) you had to take?

the issue with this becomes one of honesty, however. if you look at trends whenever the government implements some sort of initiative to punish low performing districts, graduation rates suddenly increase.

isn't there some sort of theory that whenever an institution is formed to cure an ail, the ail becomes the secondary concern and survival of newly formed institution becomes the primary purpose?

I'm not sure i hate this if there's a choice.

FWIW, I attended an Episcopalian elementary school and I don't feel the least bit indoctrinated.

My post was mostly tongue in cheek as I like to clown on Inso0 for being a creationist at every opportunity. I actually went to a Catholic school for a while, one with nuns walking around and ****. It was one of the best schools in the area, and all the religious stuff was entirely optional, at least for my age group (16+).

It was more like, let's sing songs with religious undertones instead of "Wheels on the Bus" in kindergarten. Wednesday morning is a 20 minute chapel service, and there's a lot of WWJD in the conflict resolution strategy.

When you hit 7th and 8th grade, you can do after school classes to prepare you for confirmation.

Some light sprinkling of religion into the daily vernacular is a small price to pay for having your kids be able to take a bunch of AP classes in high school because they're ahead of their peers. Thanks, Jesus, for scaring everyone into line so we spend all of our time learning instead of fighting and calling the teacher a ****waffle.

I had never heard the word "****waffle" but I shall be adding it to my vernacular for use in casual conversation and perhaps the odd job interview.

Sounds like a word Mr Lahey would use.

There's a 2p2er that has that as his undertitle.

Yeah I think it’s a U.S. thing .
Here in Canada public school is fine and not too expensive , especially college and university with good quality shrug .

I mean the U.S. have some big problem in education and health care , spending so much money while having such a bad results.

But seeing how the private sector goes in healthcare I doubt the private sector would be better in education .

But yes Luciom being on the right , they all think everything the public sector do is bad .

On the topic of american education, this is what happens when you have social justice warriors in charge of curricula in schools for decades, and a media complex that keeps the lie alive after you leave school.



https://www.skeptic.com/research-cen...t-PADS-004.pdf

On a very significant topic (especially for people on the left, in theory, who often accuse the right of erasing native history and culture) for americans, the history of the populations living in that land before the arrival of westerners, people are told a complete, absolute, utterly undefensible lie about a purported lack of intra-tribal violence among natives.

As everywhere in the world across time and geography in human history, natives butchered each others a lot , well before europeans arrived.

Why lie extensively creating a narrative that denies that obvious (for anyone with any basic knowledge of history) objective reality?

And yes it is about the total occupation of cultural centers by the left in the last decades

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GKa8lJvX...jpg&name=small

I don't know what you were taught in school in Europe. In the U.S., I certainly wasn't taught in school that there was minimal violence among native peoples prior to the arrival of Europeans. I've never heard my kids say anything to that effect either.

What is your basis for this statement?

I certainly don't think those charts support the idea that schools are promoting that idea. Maybe you weren't talking about education?

I also would note that this survey appears to be an internet opt-in survey:

If so, you can throw the whole thing in the garbage.