Education Vouchers - good or bad?
Deborah
bad? The idea behind vouchers is that, instead of paying money directly
to schools, government gives families vouchers that can be spent on
selected educational expenses. Typically, that will be school fees, but
the range of applicable expenses could well be widened to include
things like tutoring fees, books, computer programs, etc. Also,
vouchers could be extended to all kinds of specialized schools, child
care and after school care.
What one can buy with vouchers is very much part of the debate. The
primary focus of vouchers is on the education for young people who are
of an age at which education is deemed to be compulsory. But much
debate has also been on the introduction of vouchers in tertiary
education.
Anyway, before I start guiding the debate too much, let's see what kind
of views are out there, what kind of sites do have relevant background
information, etc. Feel invited to reply if you have any contributions
to this debate.
Deborah
Superdiv
their kid/s to expensive private schools. I think that is unfair
because that kid got a bigger oppurtunity to succeed than other kids
who go to less efficient public schools. Therefore I believe the
voucher system is flawed.
I would be happy to debate further on this issue
Sam
shouldn't they? But of course, school itself invented class, children
are constantly ranked and set up against each other. There's nothing
fair about school and public school simply is the last inline claiming
to be the fairest of all!
Superdiv
simply because he was too poor. If the kid could not attend school at
all, then the parents should be given enough money to allow him to
attend a school where the majority of the public kids go.
Deborah
parents should be given enough money to allow their children to go
where the other kids go? That sounds great in theory, but in practice,
parents may well have specific preferences of school, yet send their
kids to the cheapest school (read free) and use the money to fee their
shopping, gambling or drugs addictions.
This is one reason why educational vouchers are introduced as vouchers,
rather than as financial grants. Vouchers can only be used for specific
purposes, which is to prevent that the funding is used by parents for
other purposes.
Whether families choose to use the vouchers to have their kids attend a
big school or a small school is up to the respective family to decide.
They may well choose a small school in the belief that is better (in
their view), yet the majority of kids go to another school. Vouchers
put this decision in the hands of the family, where it rightfully
belongs!
malcolmkirkpatrick
why parents should get money to send their kids "where the majority of
the public kids go", since that's presumably the local government
school.
"Fair" seems to mean that everyone goes to the State monopoly school.
Such a condition means that the status quo is locked in. And why is
this "fair"? People are not equal (the same) in their interests or
abilities. School policies are designed by academics. The goals they
advance and the incentives they offer are foreign to many normal kids.
Training a mechanically or artistically inclined child for an academic
career using a transcript as an incentive is like teaching a cat to
swim, using carrots as a reward.
Why is the State (government, generally) in the education business at
all? Why schools and not bakeries, restaurants, or shoe stores? The
education business is not a natural monopoly, and there are no
economies of scale at the delivery end of the education business. The
"public goods" argument implies subsidy and regulation, at most, not
State operation of an industry.
I recommend Chubb and Moe __Politics, Markets, and America's Schools__,
and the recent Brookings study __Vouchers and the Provision of Public
Services__.
All that said, I prefer a policy I call "Parent Performance
Contracting" over school vouchers, since school vouchers are too
respectful of existing institutions. Let your Legislature mandate that
school districts --must-- hire parents, on personal service contracts,
to provide for their children's education. Make payment contingent on
performance at or above age-level expectations on standardized tests of
reading vocabulary, reading comprehension (any language) and Math. Make
payment equal to some fraction 1/2 < a/b < 1 of the district's
regular-ed per-pupil budget. Parents could then homeschool, hire
tutors, pool resources with other parents and hire a teacher,
supplement the stipend and send their kids to independent schools, or
decline the contract and send their kids to the NEA/AFT/AFSCME cartel's
schools (the "public" schools). Maximum range of options, performance
and financial accountability, and minimal threat to the independence of
private schools.
MK. Gerard Lassibile and Lucia Navarro Gomez, ["Organization and
Efficiency of Educational Systems: some empirical findings", pg. 16,
"Comparative Education", Vol. 36 #1, Feb 2000]. "Furthermore, the
regression results indicate that countries where private education is
more widespread perform significantly better than countries where it is
more limited. The result showing the private sector to be more
efficient is similar to those found in other contexts with individual
data (see, for example, Psucharopoulos, 1987; Jiminez, et. al, 1991).
This finding should convince countries to reconsider policies that
reduce the role of the private sector in the field of education".
>
Joshua Angrist, "Randomized Trials and Quasi-Experiments in Education
Research",___NBER Reporter___, summer, 2003.
http://www.nber.org/reporter/summer03/angrist.html
>
>
"...It is almost certainly more damaging for children to be in school
than to out of it. Children whose days are spent herding animals rather
than sitting in a clasroom at least develop skills of problem solving
and independence while the supposedly luckier ones in school are
stunted in their mental, physical, and emotional development by being
rendered pasive, and by having to spend hours each day in a crowded
classroom under the control of an adult who punishes them for any
normal level of activity such as moving or speaking. (DfID, 2000, pp
12, 13)" Quoted in Clive Harber, "Schooling as Violence",p. 10,
__Educatioinal Review__V. 54, #1.
>
"Violence at school is a prevalent problem. According to a national
survey of school proncipals (National Center for Educational
Statistics, 1998), over 200,000 serious fights or physical attacks
occurred in public schools during the 1996-1997 school year. Serious
violent crimes occurred in approximately 12% of middle schools and 13%
of high schools. Student surveys (Kann et al, 1995) indicate even
higher rates of aggressive behavior. Approximately 16.2% of high school
students nationwide reported involvement in a physical fight at school
during a 30-day period, and 11.8% reported carrying a weapon on school
property (Kann et al, 1995)."
"Research on victims of violence at school suggests that repeated
victimization has detrimental effects on a child's emotional and social
development (Batsche & Knoff, 1995; Hoover, Oliver, & Thomson, 1993;
Olweus, 1993). Victims exhibit higher levels of anxiety and depression,
and lower self-esteem than non-victims (eg., Besag, 1989; Gilmartin,
1987; Greenbaum, 1987; Olweus, 1993). [Karen Brockenbrough, Dewey G.
Cornell, Ann B. Loper, "Aggressive Attitudes Among Victims of Violence
at School", __Education and the Treatment of Children__, V. 25, #3,
Aug., 2002]
>
"Results showed that the over-representation of Black males that has
been cited consistently in the literature begins at the elementary
school level and continues through high school. Black females also were
suspended at a much higher rate than White or Hispanic females at all
three school levels." [Linda M. Raffaele Mendez, Howard M. Knoff;
__Education and the Treatment of Children__, V. 26, #1, Feb. 2003.
>
[Roland Meighan, "Home-based Education Effectiveness Research and
Some of its Implications",Educational Review, Vol. 47, No.3, 1995.]
"The issue of social skills. One edition of Home School Researcher,
Volume 8, Number 3, contains two research reports on the issue of
social skills. The first finding of the study by Larry Shyers (1992)
was that home-schooled students received significantly lower problem
behavior scores than schooled children. His next finding was that
home-schooled children are socially well adjusted, but schooled
children are
not so well adjusted. Shyers concludes that we are asking the wrong
question when we ask about the social adjustment of home-schooled
children. The real question is why is the social; adjustment of
schooled children of such poor quality?"
>
"The second study, by Thomas Smedley (1992), used different test
instruments but comes to the same conclusion, that home-educated
children are more mature and better socialized than those attending
school." ...p. 277
>
"12. So-called 'school phobia' is actually more likely to be a sign
of mental health, whereas school dependancy is a largely unrecognized
mental health problem"....p.281[Roland Meighan, "Home-based Education
Effectiveness Research and Some of its Implications",Educational
Review, Vol. 47, No.3, 1995.
>
"I'm sorry I have so much rage, but you put it in me." --Dylan Klebold
>
Take care. Homeschool if you can.
>
http://www.rru.com/~meo/hs.minski.html (One page. Marvin Minsky comment
on school. Please read this.)
http://www.educationevolving.org/pdf/Adolescence.pdf
http://www.educationevolving.org/clevel.asp?alevel=a2&blevel=b1
http://www.schoolchoices.org (Massive site. Useful links).
http://www.worldbank.org/research/journals/wbro/obsfeb97/educate.htm
http://www.ncl.ac.uk/egwest/pdfs/economics%20of%20compulsion.pdf
http://www.ksg.harvard.edu/pepg/
http://www.thegantelope.com/archives/cat_school_choice.html
http://www.policyreview.org/APR02/andrews.html
http://www.fraserinstitute.ca/shared/readmore.asp?sNav=pb&id=289
http://www.ncl.ac.uk/egwest/research/privateschools.html
http://post.economics.harvard.edu/faculty/hoxby/papers.html
http://www.libertyindia.org/pdfs/tooley_education.pdf
http://www.ncl.ac.uk/egwest/
>
Sam
ending all government's involvement in education, but we need to do so
as part of a broad reform package that takes many things into account.
Here are some questions that will prompt us to think beyond vouchers.
Why should families without kids pay tax to fund the school habits of
other families? Also, vouchers still determine which type of activities
are funded, which implies government bureaucrats determining the
academic curriculum to a large extent. Apart from the curriculum, it
also implies setting standards for entry into certain professions.
Currently one cannot set up a practice as doctor or lawyer without
having certain degrees. One of the biggest closed-shops is the
education system itself.
Another area that must be looked at is the way universities,
specifically scientific research, is linked to the military-industrial
complex. Personally, I believe that too many people focus on relatively
easy and straitforward parts of the reform package (like vouchers),
without seeing the entire picture. Splitting up the military is just as
urgent, if not more urgent, than educational reform.
malcolmkirkpatrick
>
Sam is ambitious. Everything is related to everything else; that's the
original stoned revelation. The K-12 education system in the US costs
taxpayers over $400 billion/year, and that's not counting the
opportunity cost of the time students spend in school or loses due to
crime and the cost of prison for the poor kids whose lives we trash. In
Hawaii, juvenile arrests fall in summer, when school's not in session.
Juvenile hospitalizations for human-induced trauma fall in summer.
Reported burglaries fall in summer. Beth Clarkson (Math Dept, Wichita
State University) found a similar seasonal variation in juvenile arrest
rates in Wichita, Ks. The BTK killer went to public school. Ted Bundy
went to public school. Ted Kaczynski wemt to public school. Timothy
McVeigh went to public school. Kathleen Soliah went to public school.
John Walker Lindh went to public school. Jose Padilla went to public
school. The Lakawanna five went to public schools. The former Hawaii
State DOE Superintendent, Paul LeMahieu, went to public school. Schools
do not prevent crime, they cause it.
>
Sometimes it seems that trying to persuade legislators to advamce the
interests of taxpayers, students, or real classroom teachers is like
trying to use words to alter the course of a mudslide. The
NEA/AFT/AFSCME cartel is a very effective, well-funded,
well-coordinated interest group. Elected politicians dare not cross
this predatory cartel. Attacking just this industry is daunting.
>
The post-secondary education industry is probably even more corrupt
than the K-12 industry, since adults can read on their own, after all.
You want to learn Roman History, read a book. You need not kiss some
professor's...toes. I regret that I must disagree with Sam about
defense contracts for research, however. National defense is one proper
function of the State. I'd add police, courts, and environmental
defense. The State blows most everything else, seems to me. It's a
complicated argument, which requires an educated audience. Let's start
with K-12 schooling.
>
Sam is correct, the State's intrusion into the education industry
includes occupational licencing. It also includes (more relevant to
K-12) child-labor and minimum-wage laws, which deprive children of
options outside of school. Albert Einstein opposed compulsory
attendance at school. Gandhi opposed compulsory attendance at school.
Most people would, properly, fear a leap into the unknown territory of
a complete departure of the State from the education industry. There
are too many "r"s in "revolution". I suggest a phased retreat, as in
school vouchers or parent performance contracting. Parent control
works.
>
Take care. Homeschool if you can.
>
> Good points! Vouchers should be seen as one step towards eventually
MoreSense
eye on the realities of politics, which implies that we have to deal
with issues one by one. We can rank them and try and give some issues
higher priority, but it's not always up to us to determine what
changes to make. We've just got to make the best of it, while keeping
an eye on the larger picture, and introducing educational vouchers is
a step in the right direction.
The Undersigned
As far as I know, families who homeschool don't get funding from
government. Should they also get vouchers, so they can spend the money
on computers, tutors, courses and educational resources?
Sam
taxation altogether, but we also need to look at other areas, like
health care, etc. The current education system provides entry tickets
into closed professions such as doctors, surgeons, psychiatrists,
dentists, pharmacists and vets, showing once more that we cannot
isolate one area from other areas. In my view, reform in security
services is needed most urgently.