Racism and school vouchers
Guy Marsh
Is it just a coincidence that funding
for public education is receding as
school districts become more populated
by children of color?
It is no coincidence that even more
money will be pulled from underfunded,
overburdened school districts by conser-
vatives who are promoting "school vou-
chers" as an alternative for the so-ca-
lled middle class.
Clearly, vouchers are a vehicle for
those who possess the mobility and the
money to attend private schools - while
at the same time assuring that those
who can't will then be relegated to an
even more underfunded, overburdened public
school system.
As administrators and school boards in
urban districts become, like their stud-
ents, people of color, and as people of
color become more of a force in urban ar-
eas, those who sit in seats of state and
federal power are attempting to pull as
much funding as possible from public ed-
ucation.
As a result, those who are left behind
will be relegated to the back seat of so-
ciety for the rest of their lives.
This is NOT acceptable !
Persevere.
Guy
Socialist Labor Party of America (SLP)
Member-at-large
http://www.slp.org
__________
Remember the U.S.S. Liberty
06-08-67
http://www.halcyon.com/jim/ussliberty
_______
Former member
Republican & Democratic
Parties
GRyan3
on a limited basis. Thousands yes thousands showed up for 150 slots. 90% were
black moms (of course no dads to be seen) were begging toget accepted so their
children could get the hell away from the jerks who cause all the trouble and
don't allow their children to learn...or LIVE in some cases... but gues what?
The liberals and the teachers' union picketed the action and the the vouchers
were aborted.
You fail to see, to this day that 1. the liberals don't do anything for you
because they feel they have you in their back pockets. (that's why they want to
keep welfare going, so you'll vote for them and 2. the republicans figure,"hey,
they aint gonna vote for us anyway. GET IT!! Vote as individuals. Forget
groups! TRY IT see what happens. The Republicans will welcome you.
Don't you wonder why the rich libs in office (cLINTON TOO) SEND their KIDS TO
PRIVATE SCHOOLS BUT WON'T ALLOW you THE CHANCE????
rACISTS COME IN ALL COLORS, AND i LOATHE THEM ALL.
George
GRyan3
>vou-
>chers" as an alternative for the so-ca-
>lled middle class.
>Clearly, vouchers are a vehicle for
>those who possess the mobility and the
>money to attend private schools - while
Dopey, if they can afford to get their kids away from being poorly educated,
safe from rape and drugs. THEY DON'T NEED VOUCHERS!!!! The voucher system are
for lower income families!!!! You believe every lie your liberal idiot leaders
tell you!
Roger Shouse
>From: gu...@ptw.com (Guy Marsh)
>Subject: Racism and school vouchers
>Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1998 14:11:51 -0700
This is too easy.
>Is it just a coincidence that funding
>for public education is receding as
>school districts become more populated
>by children of color?
It's no coincidence. Vouchers are picking up more support, especially from
young black voters, because they offer the best means for minority families to
secure a quality education for their kids.
>It is no coincidence that even more
>money will be pulled from underfunded,
>overburdened school districts by conser-
>vatives who are promoting "school vou-
>chers" as an alternative for the so-ca-
>lled middle class.
It's really questionable whether public schools are underfunded, especially
when so many spend their money ineffectively in comparison to private schools.
This is particularly true when you compare urban public schools to their urban
Catholic counterparts.
Also contrasting with your assertion is the fact that so many choice advocates
base their claims primarily on the need to provide better education for
disadvantaged kids.
>Clearly, vouchers are a vehicle for
>those who possess the mobility and the
>money to attend private schools - while
>at the same time assuring that those
>who can't will then be relegated to an
>even more underfunded, overburdened public
>school system.
In Milwaukee, the school choice program was specifically targeted for poor
urban students. Guess what? Two major peer reviewed studies indicate that
students in choice schools are outperforming comparable students in the public
schools.
>As administrators and school boards in
>urban districts become, like their stud-
>ents, people of color, and as people of
>color become more of a force in urban ar-
>eas, those who sit in seats of state and
>federal power are attempting to pull as
>much funding as possible from public ed-
>ucation.
You're crazy.
>As a result, those who are left behind
>will be relegated to the back seat of so-
>ciety for the rest of their lives.
>This is NOT acceptable !
Your arguments are not acceptable. Check it out. Polls show that blacks
favor school choice because it offers them a chance to get their kids into
decent schools.
>Persevere.
In the wrong direction, unfortunately.
Roger Shouse
Assistant Professor of Education
The Pennsylvania State University
John Gibbs
nothing to help solve the problem of a failing education system? I oppose
these vouchers because they seem to sweep the problem under the rug, rather
than address it directly. "Let all of the have's get the he** outta here,
and let all those have-not's rot in their own he**"? I don't buy into this
idea. Sometimes it takes an act of compassion to help those who apparently
cannot help themselves. We should be using our resources to fix these
schools that people are running away from, rather than running away from the
problem altogether.
What do you see happening to inner-city schools should this idea of vouchers
prevail?
Victor Levis
<6phr8o$bfs$1...@msunews.cl.msu.edu>...
> But don't you honestly think that public school vouchers do absolutely
> nothing to help solve the problem of a failing education system?
No. Competition usually spurs everyone on, including the weaker
players.
> I oppose these vouchers because
> they seem to sweep the problem under the rug, rather
> than address it directly. "Let all of the have's get the he** outta here,
> and let all those have-not's rot in their own he**"?
I see vouchers as enabling the have-nots to benefit from alternatives
that previously were limited to upper middle-class people on up.
> I don't buy into this idea.
Perhaps you should look at it from the point of view of what it takes
to give everyone the maximum number of alternatives.
> Sometimes it takes an act of compassion to help those who apparently
> cannot help themselves.
Who is that? The educrats of complacent public school districts?
> We should be using our resources to fix these schools that
> people are running away from, rather than running away from the
> problem altogether.
Some schools are costing over $10,000 per child and yet people
are running away from them. You say 'more resources'?
If it takes $15,000 per kid to 'fix' a particularly badly run school, while
a 'charter' or alternative school can be funded for $5,500 per child,
isn't it a better use of resources to use the second school?
> What do you see happening to inner-city schools should this idea of
> vouchers prevail?
New people being elected to the school boards that manage them, bringing
in a fierce desire to compete and excel, and instilling some community pride.
If that doesn't work, then I predict a rise in the number of 'charter
schools'
and other alternatives.
--
Victor Levis
Freedom of Choice......Responsibility for Actions......Respect for Others
Daniel T. Fahey
>
> John Gibbs <jo...@NOSPAM.stanford.edu> wrote in article
> <6phr8o$bfs$1...@msunews.cl.msu.edu>...
>
> > But don't you honestly think that public school vouchers do absolutely
> > nothing to help solve the problem of a failing education system?
>
> No. Competition usually spurs everyone on, including the weaker
> players.
Education is not about competition ..its about putting informaion into
kids heads.
>
> > I oppose these vouchers because
> > they seem to sweep the problem under the rug, rather
> > than address it directly. "Let all of the have's get the he** outta here,
> > and let all those have-not's rot in their own he**"?
>
> I see vouchers as enabling the have-nots to benefit from alternatives
> that previously were limited to upper middle-class people on up.
>
The City of Baltimore went to a Voucher System and it failed badly.
> > I don't buy into this idea.
>
> Perhaps you should look at it from the point of view of what it takes
> to give everyone the maximum number of alternatives.
>
> > Sometimes it takes an act of compassion to help those who apparently
> > cannot help themselves.
>
> Who is that? The educrats of complacent public school districts?
>
> > We should be using our resources to fix these schools that
> > people are running away from, rather than running away from the
> > problem altogether.
>
> Some schools are costing over $10,000 per child and yet people
> are running away from them. You say 'more resources'?
Where? Proof? A private school, perhaps!?
> If it takes $15,000 per kid to 'fix' a particularly badly run school, while
> a 'charter' or alternative school can be funded for $5,500 per child,
> isn't it a better use of resources to use the second school?
>
Your economics have no basis.. You are knocking off numbers with no
ideas of what you are talking about.. It will cost the same amount to
run a Private School as it does a Public School in any given district.
First you talk about $10k per student then $15k. If we had that kind of
money available we could find and attract better teachers and work
environments.
> > What do you see happening to inner-city schools should this idea of
> > vouchers prevail?
>
> New people being elected to the school boards that manage them, bringing
> in a fierce desire to compete and excel, and instilling some community pride.
> If that doesn't work, then I predict a rise in the number of 'charter
> schools'
> and other alternatives.
It is very evident that you have not visited a school in a long time..
Those kids are smart. Smarter than you. There are problems but that is
why we need to think about education the next generations of kids.
We have a worker shortage now because Mr. Reagan increased the cost of
college education from 1982 to 1986 almost 90%. It has since doubled.
At the same time he took away public education money from the states to
fund a military expansion. It was an average of $1 billion per state
per year.
Tell me now ..why are we stuggling so hard..This country is just now
getting back to normal with public education and the Republican Congress
is trying to destroy education in the country.
Have you not noticed a shortage in skilled, especially technical, US
born workers in this country!?. I have...
Victor go back to school..you might learn something.
DF
Victor Levis
article <35BCF0...@DanSources.com>...
> Victor Levis wrote:
> >
> > John Gibbs <jo...@NOSPAM.stanford.edu> wrote in article
> > <6phr8o$bfs$1...@msunews.cl.msu.edu>...
> >
> > > But don't you honestly think that public school vouchers do absolutely
> > > nothing to help solve the problem of a failing education system?
> >
> > No. Competition usually spurs everyone on, including the weaker
> > players.
>
> Education is not about competition ..its about putting informaion into
> kids heads.
Actually, the competition is over who gets to run the institutions that
teach our children how to think (I don't like the phrase "putting information
into kids' heads").
> > > I oppose these vouchers because they seem
> > > to sweep the problem under the rug, rather than address
> > > it directly. "Let all of the have's get the he** outta here,
> > > and let all those have-not's rot in their own he**"?
> >
> > I see vouchers as enabling the have-nots to benefit from alternatives
> > that previously were limited to upper middle-class people on up.
>
> The City of Baltimore went to a Voucher System and it failed badly.
Please post some details or where I can learn more about this
program.
> > > We should be using our resources to fix these schools that
> > > people are running away from, rather than running away from the
> > > problem altogether.
> >
> > Some schools are costing over $10,000 per child and yet people
> > are running away from them. You say 'more resources'?
>
> Where? Proof? A private school, perhaps!?
Washington, DC, according to some numbers recently posted on UseNet
and accepted by both sides of the argument.
> > If it takes $15,000 per kid to 'fix' a particularly badly run school,
while
> > a 'charter' or alternative school can be funded for $5,500 per child,
> > isn't it a better use of resources to use the second school?
>
> Your economics have no basis.. You are knocking off numbers with no
> ideas of what you are talking about.
Of course the $15000 was a hypothetical, in response to the person
who said MORE resources should be dedicated.
> It will cost the same amount to
> run a Private School as it does a Public School in any given district.
Now that's an open mind. Have you studied this?
> First you talk about $10k per student then $15k. If we had that kind of
> money available we could find and attract better teachers and work
> environments.
The solution isn't ALWAYS more money, though.
> > > What do you see happening to inner-city schools should this idea of
> > > vouchers prevail?
> >
> > New people being elected to the school boards that manage them, bringing
> > in a fierce desire to compete and excel, and instilling some community
pride.
> > If that doesn't work, then I predict a rise in the number of 'charter
> > schools' and other alternatives.
>
> It is very evident that you have not visited a school in a long time..
HILARIOUS! I happen to be in many schools, and on a frequent basis.
I interact with school administrators, board administrators, parents
and children.
> Those kids are smart. Smarter than you.
Some children are undoubtedly smarter than you and I both. So?
Isn't that a good thing?
> There are problems but that is
> why we need to think about education the next generations of kids.
Agreed. And it is why I dedicate a considerable amount of time to
the public school board in my area.
> We have a worker shortage now because Mr. Reagan...
<snip off-topic complaints about American Republicans>
> Victor go back to school..you might learn something.
Such manners. Do you find yourself convincing many people with
your charming style?
Guy Marsh
> > Victor Levis wrote:
> > >
> > > John Gibbs <jo...@NOSPAM.stanford.edu> wrote in article
> > > <6phr8o$bfs$1...@msunews.cl.msu.edu>...
> > >
> > > > But don't you honestly think that public school vouchers do absolutely
> > > > nothing to help solve the problem of a failing education system?
> > >
> > > No. Competition usually spurs everyone on, including the weaker
> > > players.
> >
> > Education is not about competition ..its about putting informaion into
> > kids heads.
>
> Actually, the competition is over who gets to run the institutions that
> teach our children how to think (I don't like the phrase "putting information
> into kids' heads").
>
>
>
> > > > I oppose these vouchers because they seem
> > > > to sweep the problem under the rug, rather than address
> > > > it directly. "Let all of the have's get the he** outta here,
> > > > and let all those have-not's rot in their own he**"?
> > >
> > > I see vouchers as enabling the have-nots to benefit from alternatives
> > > that previously were limited to upper middle-class people on up.
> >
> > The City of Baltimore went to a Voucher System and it failed badly.
Victor Levis <vicl...@ican.net> wrote:
> Please post some details or where I can learn more about this
> program.
The details concern a for-profit
"school" firm called "EAI (Education
Alternatives Inc.), which was founded
by a former Xerox salesman John Golle.
In 1992, EAI signed a 5-year contract
with the city of Baltimore to run eight
elementary and one middle school. The
number was later increased to, I believe,
eleven.
Initially, political support for the
experiment was quite high. But by the
fall of 1995, EAI was given the boot by
the city of Baltimore.
The most significant problem with the
company was that despite the fact that
its schools received more funding than
the schools which remained public, it
didn't do any better.
For example, EAI received 11% more per
school than comparable Baltimore public
schools. But EAI's "students" did no
better academically, and in reading they
actually performed worse.
Furthermore, it was discovered that the
firm had violated special education rules,
and had "main streamed" special ed students
not as a matter of educational form, but
as a way to save money - generate more
profit (imagine that).
Just as disturbing, yet not surprising, was
that EAI was compelled to repay the city
of Baltimore $338,500 in 1994 because it
had used inflated enrollment figures (im-
agine that).
This outfit also lied through its prover-
bial teeth by announcing that attendance
had improved by 22.2% in its "schools".
The true figure was but 2.2% (what a shock,
eh?).
But does it end here? No, no it doesn't.
Persevere.
Victor Levis
<MPG.1027069b4...@news.ptw.com>...
> Victor Levis <vicl...@ican.net> wrote:
>
> > Someone wrote:
> >
> > > The City of Baltimore went to a Voucher System and it failed badly.
> >
> > program.
>
> The details concern a for-profit
> "school" firm called "EAI (Education
>
> In 1992, EAI signed a 5-year contract
> with the city of Baltimore to run eight
> elementary and one middle school. The
> number was later increased to, I believe,
> eleven.
Sorry, this is not a voucher system.
It appears that the city simply contracted for a separate administration
for several schools, but the parents had no more financial stake in the
EAI schools than they had in the 'regular' school board ones.
> The most significant problem with the
> company was that despite the fact that
> its schools received more funding than
> the schools which remained public, it
> didn't do any better.
Happens in public schools, too.
> For example, EAI received 11% more per
> school than comparable Baltimore public
> schools. But EAI's "students" did no
> better academically, and in reading they
> actually performed worse.
Happens all over the place when you compare some schools to
others. Without information on the background of the students
and the schools involved, little can be concluded.
> Furthermore, it was discovered that the
> firm had violated special education rules,
> and had "main streamed" special ed students
> not as a matter of educational form, but
> as a way to save money - generate more
> profit (imagine that).
I know of public school boards who do exactly the same thing.
> Just as disturbing, yet not surprising, was
> that EAI was compelled to repay the city
> of Baltimore $338,500 in 1994 because it
> had used inflated enrollment figures (im-
> agine that).
Public bodies have lied, too. The institutional arrangement
you are talking about has all the pitfalls of regular school boards.
In particular, you have administration hired by elected officials,
all the money coming from the taxpayers, and little clout in the
hands of the parents of the children.
Indeed, if you want to assign blame, why not assign it to the
politicians who hired EAI? Why blame parental choice for any
failures here?
I don't doubt, for the moment, that there were problems with EAI.
But this was not a voucher system, from your description.
Larry Hewitt
Victor Levis wrote in message <01bdba2c$b699c4e0$24ac9a8e@viclevis>...
>Guy Marsh <gu...@ptw.com> wrote in article
><MPG.1027069b4...@news.ptw.com>...
>
>> Victor Levis <vicl...@ican.net> wrote:
>>
>> > Someone wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > program.
>>
>> The details concern a for-profit
>> "school" firm called "EAI (Education
>>
>> In 1992, EAI signed a 5-year contract
>> with the city of Baltimore to run eight
>> elementary and one middle school. The
>> number was later increased to, I believe,
>> eleven.
>
>
>It appears that the city simply contracted for a separate administration
>for several schools, but the parents had no more financial stake in the
>EAI schools than they had in the 'regular' school board ones.
>
>
>
>> company was that despite the fact that
>> its schools received more funding than
>> the schools which remained public, it
>> didn't do any better.
>
>
Yeah, you're right about it not being a voucher system. But it IS an
excellent example of why private, for profit "solution" is not going to
work.
EAI came in with promises and goals that made us dreamy. They were given
complete control of curriculum, administration, and staffing. They were even
given extra money to buy books and instructional aids.
Standardized test scores did not improve. So they asked for MORE money and
more control - and got it. And test scores STILL did not improve. So they
were tossed out.
larry
>
>> For example, EAI received 11% more per
>> school than comparable Baltimore public
>> schools. But EAI's "students" did no
>> better academically, and in reading they
>> actually performed worse.
>
>Happens all over the place when you compare some schools to
>others. Without information on the background of the students
>and the schools involved, little can be concluded.
>
>
>> Furthermore, it was discovered that the
>> firm had violated special education rules,
>> and had "main streamed" special ed students
>> not as a matter of educational form, but
>> as a way to save money - generate more
>> profit (imagine that).
>
>I know of public school boards who do exactly the same thing.
>
>
>> Just as disturbing, yet not surprising, was
>> that EAI was compelled to repay the city
>> of Baltimore $338,500 in 1994 because it
>> had used inflated enrollment figures (im-
>> agine that).
>
>Public bodies have lied, too. The institutional arrangement
>you are talking about has all the pitfalls of regular school boards.
>In particular, you have administration hired by elected officials,
>all the money coming from the taxpayers, and little clout in the
>hands of the parents of the children.
>
>Indeed, if you want to assign blame, why not assign it to the
>politicians who hired EAI? Why blame parental choice for any
>failures here?
>
>I don't doubt, for the moment, that there were problems with EAI.
>But this was not a voucher system, from your description.
Gack
> > > Victor Levis wrote:
> > > >
> > > > John Gibbs <jo...@NOSPAM.stanford.edu> wrote in article
> > > > <6phr8o$bfs$1...@msunews.cl.msu.edu>...
> > > The City of Baltimore went to a Voucher System and it failed badly.
>
> Victor Levis <vicl...@ican.net> wrote:
>
> > Please post some details or where I can learn more about this
> > program.
>
> The details concern a for-profit
> "school" firm called "EAI (Education
> Alternatives Inc.), which was founded
> by a former Xerox salesman John Golle.
The alleged details posted by Marsh originated in
Teachers' Union Handouts.
One tends to be a little suspicious of their veracity, especially
as a web search reveals various different points of view.
Baltimore, and also Hartford, cancelled their contracts with EAI
which indicates less than full satisfaction, but meanwhile NJ and
Arizona have awarded them charters, which indicates they
must be able to present some evidence of merit. Given the
political opposition to charters it's not that easy to get one,
especially in NJ where they are numerically quite limited.
Also, charters by law pay substantially less per kid to the corporation
running them than the public schools spend; and the kids only
attend them voluntarily, so they have to have something going for
them, or they'll go broke.
Even if everything the teachers' unions said about EAI in
Baltimore were true, EAI in Baltimore still was *not* a voucher
program, but rather simply another government imposed
monopoly, this time run like a utility instead of directly by
the government.
I personally don't see too much advantage in a government
imposed monopoly, whether "privatised" or public, except
for this (proved by the Baltimore EAI experiment):
if you privatise and don't like the results, you can cancel
the contract and try something else.
If the schools are publicly run, you are basically stuck with
the morass you have. If you never experiment, you will never
improve.
Daniel T. Fahey
> I see vouchers as enabling the have-nots to benefit from alternatives
> > > that previously were limited to upper middle-class people on up.
> >
> > The City of Baltimore went to a Voucher System and it failed badly.
>
> Please post some details or where I can learn more about this
> program.
>
Good Point.
I got this out of the Baltimore Sun and similar reprint in the
Washington Post. This was follow up comments from Doug Duncan in
Montgomery County. I will try and seek out this detail.
> > > > We should be using our resources to fix these schools that
> > > > people are running away from, rather than running away from the
> > > > problem altogether.
> > >
> > > Some schools are costing over $10,000 per child and yet people
> > > are running away from them. You say 'more resources'?
> >
> > Where? Proof? A private school, perhaps!?
>
> Washington, DC, according to some numbers recently posted on UseNet
> and accepted by both sides of the argument.
I saw where the national average is actually closer to $5000 per kid.
Montgomery County is closer to $7000. From a recent County publication.
> > > If it takes $15,000 per kid to 'fix' a particularly badly run school,
> while
> > > a 'charter' or alternative school can be funded for $5,500 per child,
> > > isn't it a better use of resources to use the second school?
> >
> > Your economics have no basis.. You are knocking off numbers with no
> > ideas of what you are talking about.
>
> Of course the $15000 was a hypothetical, in response to the person
> who said MORE resources should be dedicated.
>
> > It will cost the same amount to
> > run a Private School as it does a Public School in any given district.
>
> Now that's an open mind. Have you studied this?
YES I have.. I am a business person. Lets take any costs. Buildings,
Books, Computers, Electricity, Maintenance, Teachers and Administration.
The costs are about identical. They come from the same sources.
Unless you plan to pay the teachers less.
Take another example.
Lets just take tuition for a child going to day care. Most places is
about $100 to $120 per week unless financial support is provided.
Now if we argue about how the system is managed we can talk about
efficiencies. But the logistics of education several million kids of all
thypes and backgrounds become very large.
> > First you talk about $10k per student then $15k. If we had that kind of
> > money available we could find and attract better teachers and work
> > environments.
>
> The solution isn't ALWAYS more money, though.
Maybe so.. how come the Deans at colleges can command $1 million
salaries and the head of a School System is Limited to $150k salary.
This make public education look like a bargan. Look how much college
cost and compare to public schools. Mr. Reagan policies allowed major
increases in college tuition. It really hurt. I have to spend more money
recruiting Programmers from outside the USA.
Topic 2:
I Drag Race in Stock Eliminator. Every bit of performance comes from
how well I set up the car.. However, I have to experiment with new
Technology within the rules. It costs more money.
Public Education has the same exact elements. It always cost more money.
Inflation. Competition of finding good Educators.
> > > > What do you see happening to inner-city schools should this idea of
> > > > vouchers prevail?
> > >
> > > New people being elected to the school boards that manage them, bringing
> > > in a fierce desire to compete and excel, and instilling some community
> pride.
> > > If that doesn't work, then I predict a rise in the number of 'charter
> > > schools' and other alternatives.
> >
> > It is very evident that you have not visited a school in a long time..
>
> HILARIOUS! I happen to be in many schools, and on a frequent basis.
> I interact with school administrators, board administrators, parents
> and children.
>
> > Those kids are smart. Smarter than you.
>
> Some children are undoubtedly smarter than you and I both. So?
> Isn't that a good thing?
Yes..I like dialoging with you. You have a good temper.
I have introduced a plan to the Montgomery Co School system called the
PSL..Parents Sports League. The kids run it and invite the parents to
play.
> > There are problems but that is
> > why we need to think about education the next generations of kids.
>
> Agreed. And it is why I dedicate a considerable amount of time to
> the public school board in my area.
>
> > We have a worker shortage now because Mr. Reagan...
>
> <snip off-topic complaints about American Republicans>
NOT off topic...I watched the Florida Public school system deteriorate
just after RR pulled education funding. Gov Martinez won saying he
would cut $700million in taxes. Well gov funding was cut $800mill.
Temporary school buildings are being replaced with new ones and are
higher maintenace. I have several horror articles from their and the
retirees do not want to increase taxes to pay for grossly overcrowded
schools.
This happened in every state in the union to varing degrees
> > Victor go back to school..you might learn something.
>
> Such manners. Do you find yourself convincing many people with
> your charming style?
> --
Thank you! and Appologize for getting snippy! I just disagree with some
of you views. AND after dealing with the like of really hardened posters
it becomes a bad habit.
I have gone back to school, college.. It keeps me from getting too
complacent. AND keep the juices flowing.
Dan Fahey
Daniel T. Fahey
Thanks GUY
DF
Victor Levis
> > > > > We should be using our resources to fix these schools that
> > > > > people are running away from, rather than running away from the
> > > > > problem altogether.
> > > >
> > > > Some schools are costing over $10,000 per child and yet people
> > > > are running away from them. You say 'more resources'?
> > >
> > > Where? Proof? A private school, perhaps!?
> >
> > Washington, DC, according to some numbers recently posted on UseNet
> > and accepted by both sides of the argument.
>
> I saw where the national average is actually closer to $5000 per kid.
> Montgomery County is closer to $7000. From a recent County publication.
I didn't say national average, did I? I said that even though SOME schools
spend as much as $10,000 that doesn't seem to stop the bleeding.
> > > It will cost the same amount to
> > > run a Private School as it does a Public School in any given district.
> >
> > Now that's an open mind. Have you studied this?
>
> YES I have.. I am a business person. Lets take any costs. Buildings,
> Books, Computers, Electricity, Maintenance, Teachers and Administration.
> The costs are about identical. They come from the same sources.
> Unless you plan to pay the teachers less.
See the other post I made today about a real-life educational project
to help French Immersion students in difficulty here in Montreal, and
tell me if you think a private school could ever have thought such
a cock-a-mamie scheme up.
You underestimate the potential for inefficiency in government due
to the nature of an institution that gets money from group A and
gives benefits to group B, but personally profits itself, as group C.
> Take another example.
> Lets just take tuition for a child going to day care. Most places is
> about $100 to $120 per week unless financial support is provided.
And once again government-run daycares cost more (I didn't say
charge more) than private ones, except for the cream.
> > > It is very evident that you have not visited a school in a long time..
> >
> > HILARIOUS! I happen to be in many schools, and on a frequent basis.
> > I interact with school administrators, board administrators, parents
> > and children.
So I take it that disagreement with you does not mean that I am
automatically ignorant anymore?
> > > Those kids are smart. Smarter than you.
> >
> > Some children are undoubtedly smarter than you and I both. So?
> > Isn't that a good thing?
>
> Yes..I like dialoging with you. You have a good temper.
Losing my temper over words on a screen would be quite childish.
> > > Victor go back to school..you might learn something.
> >
> > Such manners. Do you find yourself convincing many people with
> > your charming style?
> > --
> Thank you! and Appologize for getting snippy! I just disagree with some
> of you views. AND after dealing with the like of really hardened posters
> it becomes a bad habit.
Getting snippy with the 'hardened posters' isn't worth it either in my
opinion.
Perhaps this is because I take the debates too seriously. ;-)
(If I were looking just to have fun, boy could I get into it.)
Also as a public figure, it is important for me to always show a good example
of decorum.
--
Guy Marsh
"Gack" <ga...@geech.gum> wrote:
> Guy Marsh wrote:
>
> > > > Victor Levis wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > John Gibbs <jo...@NOSPAM.stanford.edu> wrote in article
> > > > > <6phr8o$bfs$1...@msunews.cl.msu.edu>...
> > > > The City of Baltimore went to a Voucher System and it failed badly.
> >
> > Victor Levis <vicl...@ican.net> wrote:
> >
> > > Please post some details or where I can learn more about this
> > > program.
> >
> > The details concern a for-profit
> > "school" firm called "EAI (Education
> > Alternatives Inc.), which was founded
> > by a former Xerox salesman John Golle.
>
> The alleged details posted by Marsh originated in
> Teachers' Union Handouts.
And your point is.............?
To clarify, no, I am not a school
teacher. I am, vocationally speak-
ing, a meatcutter who has yet to lay
eyes on a "teacher's union handout'.
> One tends to be a little suspicious of their veracity, especially
> as a web search reveals various different points of view.
Well as I often say "Don't believe
me, check it out for yourself".
Yeah, "...a web search reveals var-
ious points of view", which means
what? That my views - the easily
verified facts which I posted - are
automatically incorrect? Oh please!
Additionally, I also happen to poss-
ess but a 10th grade (formal) educa-
tion (having been permanently expell-
ed from high school in 1975). There-
fore, and since I am still quite pr-
oud of this fact, I have no special
place in my heart for the way public
schools have (EVER) been operated.
For, much like television, I see the
institution known as public schools
as being a wonderful (concept) which
is predominately controlled by the
capitalist class. And therein lies
its main problem.
Guy Marsh
"Gack" <ga...@geech.gum> wrote:
> Baltimore, and also Hartford, cancelled their contracts with EAI
> which indicates less than full satisfaction, but meanwhile NJ and
> Arizona have awarded them charters, which indicates they
> must be able to present some evidence of merit. Given the
> political opposition to charters it's not that easy to get one,
> especially in NJ where they are numerically quite limited.
> Also, charters by law pay substantially less per kid to the corporation
> running them than the public schools spend; and the kids only
> attend them voluntarily, so they have to have something going for
> them, or they'll go broke.
From what I have gathered from
a rich diversity of sources,
privately chartered "schools",
including EAI's now defunct
Baltimore "schools", receive
(more) money than their public
counterparts. This, to me, on-
ly stands to reason since pro-
fit is not only built in to the
equation, it is the primary pur-
pose of these so-called schools'
existence (their primary problem).
But, "Gack", I would welcome any
and all information to the contrary
which you might be able to provide.
> Even if everything the teachers' unions said about EAI in
> Baltimore were true, EAI in Baltimore still was *not* a voucher
> program, but rather simply another government imposed
> monopoly, this time run like a utility instead of directly by
> the government.
As I previously stated, I have no
idea what the "the teachers' union"
say about EAI. But, in all honesty,
it isn't likely to be vastly differ-
ent from what I have to say.
Yes, EAI's Baltimore (BRANCHES)
were not a part of traditional vou-
cher program. It, like all private
charters, was a quasi-voucher program.
I say "quasi-voucher program" because
such programs increase the amount of
schooling that is beholden to the mark-
place, not to local democratic control
and accountability.
> I personally don't see too much advantage in a government
> imposed monopoly, whether "privatised" or public, except
> for this (proved by the Baltimore EAI experiment):
> if you privatise and don't like the results, you can cancel
> the contract and try something else.
> If the schools are publicly run, you are basically stuck with
> the morass you have. If you never experiment, you will never
> improve.
Persevere.
Daniel T. Fahey
>
> Daniel T. Fahey <DanF...@DanSources.com> wrote in article
> <35BE22...@DanSources.com>...
>
> > > > > > people are running away from, rather than running away from the
> > > > > > problem altogether.
> > > > >
> > > > > Some schools are costing over $10,000 per child and yet people
> > > > > are running away from them. You say 'more resources'?
> > > >
> > > > Where? Proof? A private school, perhaps!?
> > >
> > > Washington, DC, according to some numbers recently posted on UseNet
> > > and accepted by both sides of the argument.
> >
> > I saw where the national average is actually closer to $5000 per kid.
> > Montgomery County is closer to $7000. From a recent County publication.
>
> spend as much as $10,000 that doesn't seem to stop the bleeding.
Which ones? Please site a public school system. Montgomery County is
among the highest. Maybe Connecticut is a little higher but I have
never seen any number higher than $8000 per student.
You said $10 to $15k.. Now did you exaggerate or do you have a specific
fact?
> > > > It will cost the same amount to
> > > > run a Private School as it does a Public School in any given district.
> > >
> > > Now that's an open mind. Have you studied this?
> >
> > YES I have.. I am a business person. Lets take any costs. Buildings,
> > Books, Computers, Electricity, Maintenance, Teachers and Administration.
> > The costs are about identical. They come from the same sources.
> > Unless you plan to pay the teachers less.
>
> See the other post I made today about a real-life educational project
> to help French Immersion students in difficulty here in Montreal, and
> tell me if you think a private school could ever have thought such
> a cock-a-mamie scheme up.
>
> You underestimate the potential for inefficiency in government due
> to the nature of an institution that gets money from group A and
> gives benefits to group B, but personally profits itself, as group C.
Hold it here..all government is not inefficient. In fact most is very
efficient and cost effective. Everyone talk about government
ineffieiency but have never seen any facts or figure as to what they are
talking about.
So I do not underestimate what is inefficient. US business and
governemtn are going through many generations to improve processes. It
has been going on ever since I can remember.
Whay do you think the government was able to cut 150000+ jobs. I bet
you do not know the reason?
If you want to know how specific the governemtn is go get a contract
with them for something.
>
> > Take another example.
> > Lets just take tuition for a child going to day care. Most places is
> > about $100 to $120 per week unless financial support is provided.
>
> And once again government-run daycares cost more (I didn't say
> charge more) than private ones, except for the cream.
Victor what government run daycares? Most daycares are private. It
still does not make much of a difference anyway. It still costs about
the same amount in labor and facilities.
> > > > It is very evident that you have not visited a school in a long time..
> > >
> > > HILARIOUS! I happen to be in many schools, and on a frequent basis.
> > > I interact with school administrators, board administrators, parents
> > > and children.
>
> So I take it that disagreement with you does not mean that I am
> automatically ignorant anymore?
>
> > > > Those kids are smart. Smarter than you.
> > >
> > > Some children are undoubtedly smarter than you and I both. So?
> > > Isn't that a good thing?
> >
> > Yes..I like dialoging with you. You have a good temper.
>
> Losing my temper over words on a screen would be quite childish.
>
> > > > Victor go back to school..you might learn something.
> > >
> > > Such manners. Do you find yourself convincing many people with
> > > your charming style?
> > > --
> > Thank you! and Appologize for getting snippy! I just disagree with some
> > of you views. AND after dealing with the like of really hardened posters
> > it becomes a bad habit.
>
> Getting snippy with the 'hardened posters' isn't worth it either in my
> opinion.
> Perhaps this is because I take the debates too seriously. ;-)
>
> (If I were looking just to have fun, boy could I get into it.)
>
> Also as a public figure, it is important for me to always show a good example
> of decorum.
It is interesting the debate that governemtn is inefficient. The same
humans I have been hiring as former governement workers were working on
the same project they were cut from..
The argument of big government is the sound of Big Companies wanting
more government work. The work is the same except a company is doing the
same work.
It still costs the same to do the same amount of work. The difference
over the years is that government has been holding private industry to a
"tough get it done correctly" policy. The tax money just goes through a
different route.
Dan Fahey
Octapi
>
>
>Is it just a coincidence that funding
>for public education is receding as
>school districts become more populated
>by children of color?
>
As usual, you make these wild generalizations without providing any facts to
back them up. The facts are:
A.) Taxpayer funding of the government monopoly school system has never
been greater
B.) Many school districts with heavy minority populations, e.g. Washington
DC, are among the best funded per student in the country
C.) In spite of A and B, the government monopoly schools are failing
miserably
Daniel T. Fahey
Hey Octapi guy:
A:
Not generizations..I work with the public school system in two states
Maryland and Georgia. Got kids in both. They have great teachers and
bright students. I work well with both systems.
The public school system also have to handle all the mental a physically
challenged students as well.
I like taxpayer funding of public schools. Half my state taxes go to
the public school systems. I do not mind having to pay more.
It is my Civic Duty to do so.
B:
SO what about minorites, what does that comment have to do with
anything? You do not know anything about WDC school funding. What they
do have is some of the OLDEST schools in the nation.
C: You lie badly or do not know what you are talking about!
The public school system is alive and well. They take on very tough
social and administrative issues head on.
If this country paid attention to the public school system with the same
resolve like they did with the Banking Crisis, we would be ahead of many
issues.
You want a quick fix.. Sorry that is not going to happen. It takes work
and dedication. A lot of it.
Now where is your Civic Duty and responsibility?
Dan Fahey
Octapi
Here's another self-serving government bureaucrat trying to convince us that
we should hand over our money so that he can destroy our kid's future.
Well Dan, your kind is quickly being exposed. There's a huge ground swell
of dissatisfaction with the government monopoly schools growing in the this
country. The NEA had to spend tens of billions of dollars to fight off
vouchers in California. It's only a matter of time before California or
another smart state in the west passes vouchers or some other form of school
privatization. Once that happens it will sweep the country and you'll find
yourself on the unemployment line where you belong.
dgenius
heartedly with you. Being a student in the public school system, I have
first hand experience. First off, the schools themselves are in horrible
condition. The original schools erected in the 60's were based on plans for
schools in California. The buildings have flat roofs, and no hallways
connecting the various wings. Worst of all, this is in the Pacific
Northwest, and not a room in the entire school is without a leak of some
kind. Second, the staffing need a bit of training on the mindset of today's
children. When a teacher treats you as if you are eight years old, instead
of thirteen, you not only become frustrated, but lose respect for them as
well. And when you lose your respect for them, you don't take anything they
say seriously. They also need to be intellectual, instead of quoting
everything from the out of date textbooks. A teacher whose mistakes you
frequently correct, should not even be teaching in my opinion. A little bit
more funding would also help. In science class this year we were frequently
running out of chemicals, fortunately the teacher was more than qualified
and substituted them with other substances that would achieve the desired
effect.
We finally passed a levy this year, and will be recieving a new school!
Thankfully the administrators are equipping it with a slanted roof, and are
also giving the other schools slanted roofs on top of the flat concrete ones
we presently have. Unfortunately, the faculty remains, with no extra
training or replacements. Levys should not even have to voted on, the
education of our future is more important than saving a few dollars, and the
reason most of the levys are not passed in this town is because it is
primarily military, and people do not vote in favor because they will be
moving away in a short while. Federal Impact Aid does little to help the
problem...
-dgenius
Octapi wrote in message <6qev8o$f0b$1...@news-1.news.gte.net>...
Victor Levis
<6pkos1$tke$1...@tank.charm.net>...
> Victor Levis wrote in message <01bdba2c$b699c4e0$24ac9a8e@viclevis>...
>
> >Guy Marsh <gu...@ptw.com> wrote in article
> ><MPG.1027069b4...@news.ptw.com>...
> >
> >> Larry Hewitt wrote:
> >> > The City of Baltimore went to a Voucher System and it failed badly.
> >>
> >> The details concern a for-profit
> >> "school" firm called "EAI (Education
> >> Alternatives Inc....
> >>
> >> In 1992, EAI signed a 5-year contract
> >> with the city of Baltimore to run eight
> >> elementary and one middle school. The
> >> number was later increased to, I believe,
> >> eleven.
> >
> >Sorry, this is not a voucher system.
> >
> >It appears that the city simply contracted for a separate administration
> >for several schools, but the parents had no more financial stake in the
> >EAI schools than they had in the 'regular' school board ones.
> >
> >> The most significant problem with the
> >> company was that despite the fact that
> >> its schools received more funding than
> >> the schools which remained public, it
> >> didn't do any better.
> >
> >Happens in public schools, too.
>
> Yeah, you're right about it not being a voucher system. But it IS an
> excellent example of why private, for profit "solution" is not going to
> work.
No one here claimed that simply allowing the operators of a system the
right to 'profit' openly would change the workings of this publicly-funded
model.
> EAI came in with promises and goals that made us dreamy. They were given
> complete control of curriculum, administration, and staffing. They were
even
> given extra money to buy books and instructional aids.
Sounds EXACTLY like a new Director-General coming in to a school board.
> Standardized test scores did not improve. So they asked for MORE money and
> more control - and got it.
Sounds exactly like a new Director-General exercising her mandate.
> And test scores STILL did not improve. So they
> were tossed out.
Ahhhh, the only advantage of a contracted solution. Getting rid of
a civil servant is much harder, though it is sometimes done for
egregious cause, such as embezzlement.
That happened here, too. A judge just upheld the firing of a Director-
General over six years ago for triple claiming expenses.
None of the AEI problems were traced by Mr. Marsh to parental leverage
and influence, or the fact that choice was permitted (no one has even
posted the extent of choice in Baltimore, so I can't comment.)
As a public school board elected commissioner, I STILL support
mechanisms to increase parental choice and provide healthy
inter-school competition for results.
JBeacon
>
> Larry Hewitt <hew...@charm.net> wrote in article
> <6pkos1$tke$1...@tank.charm.net>...
>
Big snips;
The details concern a for-profit "school" firm called "EAI (Education
Alternatives Inc....
In 1992, EAI signed a 5-year contract with the city of Baltimore
The most significant problem with the company was that despite the
fact that its schools received more funding than the schools which
remained public, it didn't do any better. Happens in public schools,
too.
Yeah, you're right about it not being a voucher system. But it IS an
excellent example of why private, for profit "solution" is not going to
work.
> EAI came in with promises and goals that made us dreamy. They were given complete control of curriculum, administration, and staffing. They were even given extra money to buy books and instructional aids.
>
> Sounds EXACTLY like a new Director-General coming in to a school board.
> Standardized test scores did not improve. So they asked for MORE money and more control - and got it.
> As a public school board elected commissioner, I STILL support
> mechanisms to increase parental choice and provide healthy
> inter-school competition for results.
> Victor Levis
> Freedom of Choice......Responsibility for Actions......Respect for Others
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The solution to the school problem is simple. Its not more money, more
books, more teachers, etc, it simply get smarter students.
Did you ever hear the saying that you cant make a silk purse out of a
pigs ear? It means that you need the right material to start with to do
the job intended.
No one has yet come up with a way to take a dumb kid, that has had
little or no expose to reading, proper english, math and current events
since birth and turn them into a normal student much less a genius.
You test scores tell the story. Im certain that the students are doing
the best they can for their abilities and background. More money is not
the answer, unless you can buy them a new brain.