The Opportunity Agenda: K-12 Vouchers

by James A. Bacon

The fastest, quickest, most sure-fire way to eliminate “structural racism” in Virginia’s public education system is to empower parents financially to find alternatives to failing public schools.

Let’s crunch a few numbers. This fiscal year, 2021, the General Assembly has allocated a bit more than $7 billion in direct aid to education. This sum supplements funds that local governments raise from local taxes for their school systems. In 2018, there were roughly 1.6 million school-age children in Virginia (a number that includes children who are home schooled or who attend private school). That averages out to roughly $4,500 in state aid per child.

The Commonwealth should convert that $4,500 aid into a voucher for any family seeking an alternative education, be it home schooling or a private school. That sum is not enough, by itself, to cover the cost of a private-school education. But it could well make the difference on the margin to thousands of families considering keeping a parent at home to teach their child or need help paying a private-school tuition.

Moreover, for poor households unable to pay a dime toward their children’s educations, the voucher could supplement scholarship funds made available through the state’s education tax credit. In Fiscal Year 2019, that tax credit funded $10.8 million in scholarship funds benefiting 4,710 students. Those figures don’t include thousands of scholarships provided by private schools without benefit of the tax credit.

State vouchers would not hurt public school systems. For every $4,500 a school district loses in state aid, it is relieved of the fiscal burden of educating one less student. Yet districts still retains their local tax revenue. More local tax revenue for fewer students = more revenue per student. (Not that there is much of a correlation between spending per student and academic achievement, but the loss of funds is not a serious objection to vouchers.)

If local school districts could embrace the idea that their job is to ensure that every Virginia child receives an education, not necessarily a “public” school education, some school boards might even consider converting a portion of their local tax revenues into vouchers. Imagine what that would do to unleash the creativity and innovation of the private sector!

Consider the City of Richmond. The school system spends $13,667 per year, according to BestPlaces.net. Let’s say the school system retains $6,000 or so to cover the cost of maintaining its physical plant and boated bureaucratic overhead, and distributed as vouchers only the $7,389 it spends on instruction per student. That would bump up vouchers by a couple thousand dollars more. There is no reason the vouchers cannot be structured as a win-win for everyone.

If Virginia shifted decisively to a voucher-driven educational system, I do see one possible concern. A lot of flaky shaky “educators” could crawl out of the woodwork, making a play for the “free” tuition dollars. We have certainly seen the phenomenon of fly-by-night for-profit “schools” in the higher-education realm. I would be OK with a requirement that says any school (or home-school family) accepting public education dollars would have to meet the same Standards of Learning criteria as public schools.

Many details would need to be worked out. But a funding formula that empowers parents — especially the parents of poor children lacking the means to move to better school districts — would create an educational system that is far more accountable than the multilayered, bureaucratically encumbered playpen for radical ideologies that we have now. Vouchers are what an Opportunity Agenda looks like.


Share this article



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)


Comments

59 responses to “The Opportunity Agenda: K-12 Vouchers”

  1. LarrytheG Avatar
    LarrytheG

    re: ” I would be OK with a requirement that says any school (or home-school family) accepting public education dollars would have to meet the same Standards of Learning criteria as public schools.”

    WOW! Shades of Betsy DeVos!

  2. sherlockj Avatar
    sherlockj

    Vouchers are the right answer. Charter schools would become the default public education system. None of them would support the stifling bureaucracies that eat up most of the education budgets.

    Top-down managed education system is fueling the rise of socialism and anti-Americanism found in critical theory and taught starting in kindergarten.

    With vouchers, the critical theory hustlers would have to sell their wares to parents in the marketplace. There would be virtually no takers. I dare them to put their offerings to that test.

    Cutting the government educational bureaucracy in half is a start. Between 1950 and 2013, for example, the number of public school administrative and non-teaching positions soared 702 percent, while the student population increased just 96 percent. Over that same period, teachers’ numbers also increased―252 percent―but still far short of administrators and non-teaching personnel. (https://cascadepolicy.org/education/americas-bloated-school-bureaucracies/)

    It would have the dual public value of wiping out a considerable portion of a generation of Ed.D.’s that have collectively reduced the level of scholarship in education by suppressing data that does not support their feelings. They take feelings, morph them into theories and then construct “research” that they offer as proof of the theories. The “proof” is often offered with circular references. Does anyone think that the best and brightest are getting doctorates in education?

    I include here words from a 2012 article in the Atlantic by Phillip K. Howard:

    To Fix America’s Education Bureaucracy, We Need to Destroy It

    “Successful schools don’t have a formula, other than that teachers and principals are free to follow their instincts.

    PHILIP K. HOWARD
    APRIL 2, 2012
    3

    Successful schools don’t have a formula, other than that teachers and principals are free to follow their instincts.

    America’s schools are being crushed under decades of legislative and union mandates. They can never succeed until we cast off the bureaucracy and unleash individual inspiration and willpower.

    Schools are human institutions. Their effectiveness depends upon engaging the interest and focus of each student. A good teacher, studies show, can dramatically improve the learning of students. What do great teachers have in common? Nothing, according to studies — nothing, that is, except a commitment to teaching and a knack for keeping the students engaged (see especially The Moral Life of Schools). Good teachers don’t emerge spontaneously, and training and mentoring are indispensable. But ultimately, effective teaching seems to hinge on, more than any other factor, the personality of the teacher. Skilled teachers have a power to engage their students — with spontaneity, authority, and wit.”

    “Good teachers typically are found in schools with good cultures. Experts say you can tell if a school is effective within five minutes of walking in. Students are orderly and respectful when changing classes; there’s a steady hum of activity. Good school culture typically grows out of good leadership. Here as well, there are many variations of success. KIPP schools have a formula that includes, for students, longer hours and strict accountability to core values, and, for teachers, a cooperative role in developing school activities and pedagogy. David Brooks recently described a highly successful school in Brooklyn that abandons the teacher-in-front-of-class model in favor of collaborative learning. Students sit around larger tables trying to solve problems or discuss the task at hand. In every successful school, whatever its theory of education, a good culture sweeps everyone along, as if by a strong tide, towards common goals of discovery and learning.”

    “Successful teaching and good school cultures don’t have a formula, but they have a necessary condition: teachers and principals must feel free to act on their best instincts. Minute by minute, as they respond to students and each other, their focus must be on doing what’s right. Humans can only focus on one thing at a time, sociologist Robert Merton observed. That’s why it’s vital for teachers to be thinking only about how to communicate the lesson to the students in front of them. Any diversion of this focus is apt to be seen as indifference or boredom, and will break the magic.”

    “This is why we must bulldoze school bureaucracy. It is a giant diversion, focused on compliance to please some administrator far away. Every minute spent filling out a form or worrying about compliance interferes with the human interaction that is the essence of effective teaching.”

    “Law is everywhere in schools. It permeates every nook and cranny. Teachers spend hours every week filling out forms that no one ever reads — because the laws and regulations that have piled up over the years require them. Hardly any interaction is free of legal implications. Teachers are instructed never — never ever — to put an arm around a crying child: the school might get sued. Misbehavior and disrespect are met with weakness and resignation; teachers are trained to be stoics, tolerating disorder rather than running the risk of a “due process” hearing in which the teacher, not the student, must justify her decision. Principals suffer a similar inversion of authority with teachers, who are armed with hundreds of pages of work rules that prescribe exactly what teachers can be asked to do. Managing a school — say, setting the hours, deciding how to spend the budget, and deciding which teachers are doing the job — is an oxymoron. Public schools today are, by law, basically unmanageable.”

    Throw onto the legal pile a mono-minded compulsion — complete with legal penalties — to satisfy minimum standardized test scores. Recess has been canceled, arts and humanities courses scrapped, and creative interaction replaced by rote drills — largely because of one law, known as No Child Left Behind. Another unintended effect of focusing only on the lowest performers is that all the all the other students get left behind. Teachers are treated like machine tools, their personalities and passions extruded through rigid drilling protocols. Demoralization has never been considered a good management strategy, but that’s what NCLB has accomplished. One teacher in Florida put it this way: “I love teaching, I love kids, but it’s become harder and harder when you’re teaching to the test. Can you hear the discouragement in my voice?”

    “America’s schools face many external challenges, particularly the breakdown of the nuclear family and an imbedded underclass. But numerous public, charter, and parochial schools succeed notwithstanding these challenges. What all these successful schools have in common is that somehow, usually with strong leadership, they figure out how to repress the bureaucracy and unleash the human spirit. “We have a great deal of freedom here,” observed a teacher at a successful school studied by Sara Lawrence-Lightfoot, because the principal “protects his faculty from ‘the arbitrary regulations of the central authority.’”

    “The organizational flaw in America’s schools is that they are too organized. Bureaucracy can’t teach. American schools have been organized “on the totally erroneous assumption,” management expert Peter Drucker observed, “that there is one right way to learn and it is the same for everyone.” We must give educators freedom to be themselves. This doesn’t mean they should be unaccountable. But they should be accountable for overall success, including, especially, success at socialization of students through a healthy school culture, not just objective test scores. This requires scrapping the current system — all of it, federal, state, and local, as well as union contracts. We must start over and rebuild an open framework in which real people can find inspiration in doing things their own way.”

    1. Nancy_Naive Avatar
      Nancy_Naive

      This from someone who spent his adult life in a caste-like system American subculture?

  3. WayneS Avatar

    A lot of public school teachers would stand to lose their jobs.

    1. sherlockj Avatar
      sherlockj

      No, kids will still need teachers wherever they learn. It is overpaid and hugely bloated bureaucracy of “educator” administrators that would lose their jobs.

      1. WayneS Avatar

        If there are fewer children in the public schools then fewer public school teachers will be needed.

        1. sherlockj Avatar
          sherlockj

          More would be needed in private and charter schools.

  4. Dick Hall-Sizemore Avatar
    Dick Hall-Sizemore

    This would be a subsidy primarily for the well-off.

    The results of a Google search shows tuition for private schools in the Richmond area for older kids ranging from $8,580 to $34,390. (Some schools charge less for younger children.) Even with a $4,500 voucher, few poor or lower middle class families will be able to afford the difference. The financial aid the schools give is probably already committed, so there won’t be any left over for these new poor students with vouchers. And there is the question of capacity–how many additional kids can these schools accommodate. In the end, the rich parents who can afford full tuition would get $4,500 for each of their children already being sent to private schools.

    Now, if Jim would limit this voucher to public schools of any jurisdiction, I would be fine with that. Under such a scenario, the students of Richmond could take the state financial assistance provided for them and enroll in Henrico or Chesterfield schools. This would probably be a financial win for the counties because the marginal cost of educating an extra student coming from Richmond would probably be less than $4,500.

    By the way, suppose the private schools that already exist do not want to abide by the SOL standards? That is one of their attractions. That would severely limit the number of places to use those vouchers.

    1. LarrytheG Avatar
      LarrytheG

      re: ” Now, if Jim would limit this voucher to public schools of any jurisdiction, I would be fine with that. Under such a scenario, the students of Richmond could take the state financial provided for them and enroll in Henrico or Chesterfield schools. This would probably be a financial win for the counties because the marginal cost of educating an extra student coming from Richmond would probably be less than $4,500.”

      what say you Jim? seems like an important point – assuming that somehow the kid could get back and forth to those schools….

      1. TooManyTaxes Avatar
        TooManyTaxes

        Minnesota law give “[s]tudents in Minnesota [] school choice options by law. These options include open enrollment, charter schools, and approved public online schools. Many districts also offer unique program options such as magnets, gifted and talented, targeted services, alternative learning, English Learner (EL), special education, and online or blended learning.” https://education.mn.gov/MDE/dse/fsce/mod/choice/

        The state works out the money shifting. Why can’t that work in Virginia?

        1. Reed Fawell 3rd Avatar
          Reed Fawell 3rd

          Why cannot Success Academy financing model used in New York City, and elsewhere, be applied in Richmond, and Northern Va.?

          1. Reed Fawell 3rd Avatar
            Reed Fawell 3rd

            So the answer to my question, thanks to WayneS’s comment, is that Virginia can appropriate monies to Success Academies established in Virginia. The state needs only the will and wisdom to do so, an act that will nearly guarantee that many poor Virginia children will get a great and very valuable FREE education leading to College.

            That statement now has been proven by the history of Success Academy schools over nearly two decades now. Success Academy graduates have a greatly improved chance of attending college, and being empowered by a Success Academy education to lift themselves out of poverty and the dead end streets of their long poor and ravaged neighborhoods.

            In this regard please recall that Success Academies charge no tuition. Their admission policies are open. Most all their students are urban poor minority kids chosen by lottery, given their great demand for a Success Academy education.

        2. LarrytheG Avatar
          LarrytheG

          State and local tax money go to private schools?

          1. Reed Fawell 3rd Avatar
            Reed Fawell 3rd

            Success Academy is considered public as I recall, so typically occupies and/or shares public school buildings for example.

          2. TooManyTaxes Avatar
            TooManyTaxes

            Keep in mind that the reason states adopted Blaine Amendments to prevent state funding of private education was anti-Irish and Italian prejudice. The Supreme Court took until 2020 to reject that bigotry.

          3. WayneS Avatar

            Virginia Constitution
            Article VIII. Education
            Section 10. State appropriations prohibited to schools or institutions of learning not owned or exclusively controlled by the State or some subdivision thereof; exceptions to rule –

            No appropriation of public funds shall be made to any school or institution of learning not owned or exclusively controlled by the State or some political subdivision thereof; provided, first, that the General Assembly may, and the governing bodies of the several counties, cities and towns may, subject to such limitations as may be imposed by the General Assembly, appropriate funds for educational purposes which may be expended in furtherance of elementary, secondary, collegiate or graduate education of Virginia students in public and nonsectarian private schools and institutions of learning, in addition to those owned or exclusively controlled by the State or any such county, city or town; second, that the General Assembly may appropriate funds to an agency, or to a school or institution of learning owned or controlled by an agency, created and established by two or more States under a joint agreement to which this State is a party for the purpose of providing educational facilities for the citizens of the several States joining in such agreement; third, that counties, cities, towns, and districts may make appropriations to nonsectarian schools of manual, industrial, or technical training, and also to any school or institution of learning owned or exclusively controlled by such county, city, town, or school district.

            In Virginia, state and local tax money can go to private schools in certain situations. Does it right now? I honestly don’t know.

          4. Dick Hall-Sizemore Avatar
            Dick Hall-Sizemore

            State Tuition Assistance Grants for college students are made for Virginia residents attending private institutions of higher education. The amount for each student in the current fiscal year is $3,750.

            As Wayne S. sets out, the Virginia constitution authorizes state appropriations for nonsectarian private schools and, as TMT notes, the recent U.S. Supreme Court decision probably means that this distinction is unconstitutional. There are no sectarian institutions of higher education in Virginia (that I know of). As for K-12 schools, I don’t know of any state appropriations that benefit private schools, sectarian or nonsectarian. If there are any that are available only for nonsectarian, they would be subject to challenge as being in violation of the U.S. Constitution.

    2. For sure, the voucher wouldn’t suffice to send a kid to an elite prep school. But there are private schools that run very lean administratively, have higher pupil teacher ratios (but still deliver good results academically), and otherwise keep their costs down to $7,000 to $8,000 per student.

      I’d be open to the idea of giving Richmond students vouchers to schools in Henrico and Chesterfield. Not sure that Henrico and Chesterfield would want them, though.

      1. LarrytheG Avatar
        LarrytheG

        that’s the second part. Public schools have to take any/all demographics and the duty to educate them… Voucher schools that won’t – do they still get vouchers if they turn down would be attendees?

      2. Dick Hall-Sizemore Avatar
        Dick Hall-Sizemore

        So, a poor or lower middle class family with two kids in school would only have to come up with $5,000 in your cheapest option. I doubt if many would be able to take this on.

        You avoided the subsidy to the rich issue.

        1. LarrytheG Avatar
          LarrytheG

          Such vouchers need to be means-tested and not be used as subsidies IMHO.

          I’m curious about the local funding part because we know that some counties with Conservative leadership WOULD use county money for non-public schools…

          And the other thing to be aware of – at the local level – is how much in property tax someone pays – who has kids. Most folks in most jurisdictions pay 3K or less in property tax … no where near what the local cost is per student.

  5. LarrytheG Avatar
    LarrytheG

    just to clarify – public schools have other costs – to including bus transportation, cafeteria, gym, music, sports, extracurricular, etc..

    there are all also employed workers… costs..

    1. WayneS Avatar

      Yes.

      The Deputy Superintendent for Facilitation of Equity Outcomes has to be paid no matter what.

  6. There’s a wonderful school just across the street from Creighton Court called Anna Julia Cooper.( https://www.annajuliacooperepiscopalschool.org/) The kids who attend are from the area and are often offered scholarships to Trinity, Collegiate and the like. When I volunteered at AJC, I kept thinking about the lunch room at Collegiate. What was it like for an AJC student to sit there listening to all the plans to go to Costa Rica over spring break? I’m not saying vouchers are a bad idea at all. I just think it’s not as simple as switching schools.

  7. Peter Galuszka Avatar
    Peter Galuszka

    Conservatives always want vouchers. Have for decades.

    1. WayneS Avatar

      Liberals always engage in sweeping generalizations. Have for decades.

      1. LarrytheG Avatar
        LarrytheG

        No, this one is pretty simple. Are you going to tax everyone to pay for private education for kids?

        that’s pretty specific.

        1. WayneS Avatar

          What does that have to do with me pointing out someone’s sweeping generalization?

          1. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            to bring the subject into focus and get to the root of those “sweeping generalizations”.

            Conservatives want vouchers but don’t bother with the core issues.

            Liberals tend to dismiss the Conservatives wants as wanting something no matter the problems.

            I support vouchers but with some major caveats that most Conservatives won’t like but at the end of the day – it does come down to who and why we do tax all of us for public education.

            Vouchers are basically taking people’s tax money for private education. That won’t ever happen without some major rules.

          2. WayneS Avatar

            Larry,

            There you go. You wrote “most conservatives”; and “liberals tend”; and you avoided the word “always”.

            You have shown how easy it is to refrain from making sweeping generalizations.

          3. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            indeed! 😉

            easy just swap out all the “alls”… 😉

        2. “It does come down to who and why we do tax all of us for public education.” Yes, absolutely; just so. We do so because “free” secondary education for all young people is something we value as a democracy. But that in no way addresses the entirely different question, should we let private-run as well as government-run schools perform this task? All vouchers do is provide a mechanism for answering that second question. You cannot mix discussion of these separate issues.

    2. Nancy_Naive Avatar
      Nancy_Naive

      I know how to fix this problem. After watching the “conservative” party for the last four years I think we liberals should agree to let them have vouchers , but only if we can remove all warning labels. In less than a generation, we won’t have anyone to whom to give a voucher.

  8. djrippert Avatar
    djrippert

    Means test the vouchers and force the counties to cough up some money on top of the $4,500.

    I am increasingly convinced that the only way to save America’s public school education system is to destroy that system and rebuild it.

    1. LarrytheG Avatar
      LarrytheG

      Got a real idea? Public education is not going to go away – it’s the education of last resort for some.

      The bigger problem is how are you going to get those without kids to fund education for kids and I do include all of those whose kids have left the nest.

      My mother-in-law used to say that she should not have to pay taxes for schools after her own kids graduated.

      How are you going to “pay” for non-public education? with taxes?

    2. Nancy_Naive Avatar
      Nancy_Naive

      Burn the village to save it, eh? Uh yep, in less than a generation…

  9. Inthemiddle Avatar
    Inthemiddle

    I’m in favor of non-profit charter schools as a part of a fully funded public school system. While public schools would like to tailor their educational efforts to meet the needs of each individual student, it is not possible to do so. Charter schools can provide focused alternatives (for example, a charter school that requires discipline, uniforms, homework and memorization). But I’m not sure how charter schools avoid the bureaucracy needed to comply with government regulations.

  10. LarrytheG Avatar
    LarrytheG

    I’m okay with taxpayer-funded non-public schools like the Success Academies in NYC as long as they accept all demographics and also have standardized testing.

    If they can compete successfully against public schools , I’m all for it.

    But I opposed to tax money going to schools that do not take all demographics and are not transparent and accountable on testing.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/a-revealing-look-at-americas-most-controversial-charter-school-system/2019/08/16/a3c09034-c02b-11e9-a5c6-1e74f7ec4a93_story.html

  11. Nancy_Naive Avatar
    Nancy_Naive

    Vouchers for the bottom 50% and open the American Opportunity credit to grades 1-12.

  12. James Wyatt Whitehead V Avatar
    James Wyatt Whitehead V

    Vouchers will come with strings attached. That is exactly the thing to avoid. Private schools have their own accreditation system that is certified and monitored by the VDOE. The average cost last year for K-8 private school tuition was $9,600 and 9-12 high school tuition about $14,000. It would be better to find a non-voucher way to make a private school education more affordable. Perhaps expanding and incentivizing the Coverdall Education Savings Plan and the 529 plan would work better. There is no doubt in my mind that the competition between private schools and public schools for the enrollment of future students would serve the best interests of families.

    1. LarrytheG Avatar
      LarrytheG

      Vouchers as a way to better help disadvantaged kids

      OR

      vouchers to help middle income folks better educate their kids for getting into better colleges?

      we have dual or many differing narratives with a hint of bait and switch… do the voucher to help disadvantaged but in reality few actually can get in and meanwhile higher income become the main beneficiaries.

      Also – in terms of parental influence – there are kids in this world without effective parents – but they have high enough incomes to get nannies, tutors, or send their kids to private boarding schools where the kids DO get very good educations… you don’t need the parent to get a good education necessarily… the only option is not just parents.

      Anyone heard of Fork Union or Fishburn or Franklin or Hargrave or Massanutten?

      Do kids that go there suffer from a lack of parental help?

      1. James Wyatt Whitehead V Avatar
        James Wyatt Whitehead V

        There has been a lot of talk about reparations. Perhaps this topic is a worthy test case to see if reparations can really have a meaningful impact.

        1. LarrytheG Avatar
          LarrytheG

          I dunno about reparations but if disadvantaged kids were sent to Fork Union – would they be educated any better than at public schools with no parental help?

          Or if disadvantaged kids were given a tutor…. would that help them like it helps kids of parents who can afford a tutor?

          1. James Wyatt Whitehead V Avatar
            James Wyatt Whitehead V

            I do think a student enrolled at Fork Union would potentially produce better academic achievement record. They seem to have a built in mentor/tutor program. Highly structured day. Boys only though. Hargrave is the same way.

            If a disadvantaged kid is given a tutor/mentor in the public school setting I would expect results here too. That would assume the student tutor match was perfect and their was compliance in the acquisition of strong habits of mind. What happens in the non tutor/mentor time is a big question.

          2. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            Agree.

            But the oft-stated premise that kids must have direct parental help or else they fail and it’s too bad for the kids that don’t have that parental help – completely ignores the reality that plenty of parents who can afford it, get tutors for their kids instead of parental help and ditto with regard to residential boarding schools that also educate without direct parental help.

            Kids can be and are successfully educated without direct parental help – that’s just a plain fact.

            Is it a matter of money for tutoring/boarding school or are kids with parents who can’t help really doomed no matter what?

            I ask these questions.

          3. James Wyatt Whitehead V Avatar
            James Wyatt Whitehead V

            You know Mr. Larry I was thinking back to the 1970s and 1980s. I can recall a reading specialist who was a big help to me in the 4th grade. She was just terrific and was able to link reading to my love of history, especially military history, science fiction, and fantasy. I worked with Mrs. Leibensperger for about 4 or 5 months as I remember it. After that initial tutoring I was able to take it the rest of the way from the 5th grade on. Really had no reading or writing ability from 1st to 4th grade though. No doubt I had some sort of learning problem. I remember words and sentences appearing as a Chinese take out menu in my mind. I remember my boss at Alvey’s Country Store in downtown Catharpin, Virginia. Mr. Alvey was a terrific boss and role model. I started working there at age 14. By the time I graduated I could do everything in that store except deposit money in the bank. I value my time at Alvey’s Store as much as my BA and MA from VPI. Mr. Alvey linked my pay raises to not only job performance but my report card too. That made a powerful impact. I started out at $3.35 an hour in 1984. I was making $8.75 an hour by graduation in 1988. I was earning more than a lot of working class customers that come thru the store. I have never really thought about this before until you and I started exchanging ideas on this subject. I never saw my parents except on the weekends. They worked non stop. Still do. I did have a Depression era grandmother and great grandmother living in the house. Neither one advanced past the 8th grade. But I must say they too placed a high value on my efforts at Alvey’s Store and school. There was no way to fool them. Excellence was expected to the best I could produce.

          4. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            James, always enjoy reading your posts! Probably back in your early life, such help was not “official” or Title 1 but rather a good teacher who say that you needed help and did it.

            I had such help also… and when I first started Community College in La Plata, Md – I had to take a new-student assessment which immediately identified me as not so good at language and grammar and I had to take remedial courses first – and now any reader of what I write knows that grammar is not my forte.

            I do think that other kids can be helped even without their parents help. We do this already for a lot of kids. The problem is when you put a lot of disadvantaged kids in the same school in a poor neighborhood – and staff that school like you do other schools – it’s a recipe for disaster.

            Every kid who is “behind” who has a normal IQ, can be helped by personal tutoring… in K thru 6. And if they do not get that help and end up not able to read, write and do math – on grade level – middle school and high school are more warehousing than education. We talk about “remediation” but it’s a much more difficult and expensive task in the 11th grade than the 4th grade.

  13. LarrytheG Avatar
    LarrytheG

    Don’t really care for the “lottery” idea that much and wonder why, if “success academy” has an educational model – that works – why not expand it and even adopt it in public schools?

    I’m agnostic on the idea that only one kind of education “works” but instead do see that there are models that do work and we need to expand and build on that and if public schools and teachers oppose that – then we might be forced to do it with magnets and the like – but if we don’t make it available to all kids – then we’re not providing equal opportunity – equity. The idea that we can only help some kids is unacceptable in concept and practice.

    we own this problem – we cannot partially fix it and claim success.

  14. TooManyTaxes Avatar
    TooManyTaxes

    “The problem is when you put a lot of disadvantaged kids in the same school in a poor neighborhood – and staff that school like you do other schools – it’s a recipe for disaster.”

    Larry, how do you explain the “Greatest Generation”? The vast majority of them had parents with an 8th grade education or 10th grade at the most. They lived through the Depression. Entire neighborhoods had more unemployed fathers than employed ones. Schools were full of “disadvantaged” (called poor back then). They didn’t have extra reading and math teachers. Class sizes were much larger then.

    Yet, despite these hardships, most of the young males (and quite a few females) went into the military and defeated the Axis and its risk to humanity. Many young women went to work in the arms factories.

    They married after the war, raised children and worked in an ever-growing economy. Were they perfect? No. Was society perfect? Hardly. But an entire generation faced much, much more poverty than did today’s poor.

    Society already pours much more money into low income schools than into non-low income schools. Yet, it’s never enough. Where is free choice and personal responsibility?

    1. LarrytheG Avatar
      LarrytheG

      TMT – those folks were not disadvantaged compared to the rest of society.

      It’s like asking about farmers and their kids when public schools first started to exist.

      It’s also this way right now in small rural counties that have only one or two elementary schools and solo middle and high schools as long as they are meeting the needs of all the kids and not just “tracking” them into “ability” classes as if their ability was static and unchangeable.

      What we are doing now is essentially grouping all the disadvantaged kids in some schools and grouping all the kids with college-educated parents in other schools.

      We’ve known this for decades, and we tried busing but parents were not having it – so we gave up and now our schools are located in neighborhoods where the neighborhoods reflect the demographics of the folks who live there.

      People who are not well educated and can only find low-earning jobs – end up not able to afford a house or even an apartment in any neighborhood – they end up with other low-income people.

      Now some folks think you can solve this problem with “Success Academies”. I’m not convinced yet but if such an “academy” is willing to locate in a low-income neighborhood and take any/all kids in that neighborhood AND they produce academic achievement – then I’m on board.

      The big difference is the folks who know there are problems and want to find better solutions – and the other group that basically accepts the status quo or even defends it.

      Not acceptable in my view and no, once again, we cannot save all of them – but when an entire demographic with normal IQs is going down the tubes – we’re messed up.

      1. Reed Fawell 3rd Avatar
        Reed Fawell 3rd

        “The problem is when you put a lot of disadvantaged kids in the same school in a poor neighborhood – and staff that school like you do other schools – it’s a recipe for disaster.”

        Yes, with today’s public schools.

        And the Success Academy schools show precisely how to turn that recipe for disaster into a recipe for success using the very same public school kids in the very same public school building, and do it all without charging money to the kids or their parents. Simple put, Success Academy schools are public schools that really work, giving those kids a superb education that saves those kids their future (including college) for most all kids who graduate.

        The lottery is imposed only because far more of these impoverished minority kids apply that there a seats available in Success Academy schools. Why is that shortage of seat available? Corrupt public school teacher’s unions who buy off corrupt politicians, that is why.

      2. TooManyTaxes Avatar
        TooManyTaxes

        What part of low-income schools get a lot more money per pupil than non-low income schools did you miss? We devote significant amounts of federal and state (often local) tax dollars to kids from low income neighborhoods. Those schools have smaller classes, more specialist teachers (reading and math) and often more counselors, etc. But it’s never enough.

        LBJ promised an end to poverty 55 years ago. And how many billions and billions ago.

        Why did more impoverished families turn out the Greatest Generation? They were much more deprived as compared to those families at the top than are poor people today.

        People make bad decisions. Bad things happen to good people. My great grandfather was 9 when his father died. My grandfather was 3 when his father died. My dad was 8 when his father died. Three generations living in impoverished female led homes without any financial safety net. And now we want taxpayers to guarantee results.

        1. LarrytheG Avatar
          LarrytheG

          no – you need to read this:
          https://www2.ed.gov/rschstat/eval/title-i/school-level-expenditures/school-level-expenditures.pdf

          ” Conclusions

          This report examined the extent to which state and local expenditures were equitably distributed across schools within districts, based on school-level expenditure data for the 2008–09 school year that districts and states reported in response to a requirement under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA). Overall, the study found that per-pupil personnel expenditures from state and local funds often varied considerably across schools within districts, and nearly half of all schools (47 percent) had per-pupil personnel expenditures that were more than 10 percent above or below their district’s average. However, some expenditure differences were related to school grade level: high schools and middle schools tended to have higher per-pupil expenditures than elementary schools.”

          Johnson did not attempt to completely get rid of poverty – but he DID reduce it substantially. You forget Medicare by the way. Before Medicare many older people went broke or died when they got sick.

          You keep talking about the Greatest Generation. Do you know what happened to black people who served in the military after WWII?
          read up.Where do you think poor blacks come from today? From the “greatest generation” that were black?

          re: bad choices – completely agree – but you ought to have the same percentage across all races, no?

          what does it mean when one race or culture has a much higher percentage? Does that mean as a race they make worse decisions?

          1. TooManyTaxes Avatar
            TooManyTaxes

            I think a fair argument can be made about continuing discrimination against blacks from WWII and going forward.

            But why would you assume that there should be equal results based on race alone? How do you explain Asian immigrants to the United States since 1970? And an awful lot of the Asian refugees from SE Asia after the Vietnam War were dirt poor.

            And “yes,” expenditures do vary between schools in the same system. A boatload more money is spent in low-income schools than in non-low income schools. Some Fairfax County Public School have average class sizes in the teens (low income); some other schools (non-low income) have average class sizes over 30. Yes, there is discrimination in favor of poor kids.

            But it’s never enough. Society is obligated to provide a reasonable amount of additional resources to help kids in low income areas but parents and students have an equal obligation to take best advantage of those resources. Many will but many won’t. You make choices in this world.

          2. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            re: ” think a fair argument can be made about continuing discrimination against blacks from WWII and going forward.”

            rampant discrimination that denied a decent education.

            “But why would you assume that there should be equal results based on race alone? How do you explain Asian immigrants to the United States since 1970? And an awful lot of the Asian refugees from SE Asia after the Vietnam War were dirt poor.”

            never ever said equal outcome. In fact keep saying it’s not equal outcome but that don’t change the claim – over and over.

            “And “yes,” expenditures do vary between schools in the same system. A boatload more money is spent in low-income schools than in non-low income schools. Some Fairfax County Public School have average class sizes in the teens (low income); some other schools (non-low income) have average class sizes over 30. Yes, there is discrimination in favor of poor kids.”

            How do you know about the money? Have you got a link that supports what you are claiming? The article says there is a lot of variance… do you know specifics for NoVa on a per school basis?

            “But it’s never enough. Society is obligated to provide a reasonable amount of additional resources to help kids in low income areas but parents and students have an equal obligation to take best advantage of those resources. Many will but many won’t. You make choices in this world.”

            It’s never enough if it is not effective.

            We all make choices but when an entire demographic ends up worse off – that’s not about choices . “Choices” would be some percentage of total numbers then it should allocate out in the same proposition to sub groups. When it does not – it’s not about “choices” it’s about how does an entire demographic end up worse off. Spending more money when the system itself is not working is a bad excuse for doing nothing.

          3. TooManyTaxes Avatar
            TooManyTaxes

            Larry, here’s one from the Fairfax County Public School budget. More money for middle schools serving poor kids.

            “The number of classroom positions assigned to a middle school is determined by formulas approved by the School Board. Each year, school-based positions are recalculated based on the projected enrollment for the next year. At the middle school level, the number of teachers assigned is calculated based on teacher load, or the number of students a teacher instructs on a daily basis. The FY 2020 Approved Budget formula is the ratio of general education enrollment x 7 (class periods) ÷ 139.5 (Regular Maximum Teacher Load). An additional staffing allocation is provided to schools based on the percentage of students eligible for free and reduced-price meals (FRM) in the form of needs-based staffing and the number of students receiving English for Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL) services. These programs and their related expenses are detailed separately in the Program Budget. Ratio-based formulas also are used to allocate other positions to schools. The School Board approved staffing formulas are available in the Appendix.”

            https://www.fcps.edu/sites/default/files/media/pdf/FY_2020_Program_Budget.pdf at page 43.

            Here’s high schools.

            “The number of classroom positions assigned to a high school is determined by formulas approved by the School Board. Each year, school-based positions are recalculated based on the projected enrollment for the next year. At the high school level, the number of teachers assigned is calculated based on teacher load, or the number of students a teacher instructs on a daily basis. The FY 2020 Approved Budget formula ratio is general education
            membership x 6 (class periods) ÷ 155.0 (Regular Maximum Teacher Load). English teachers are allocated using
            a regular maximum teacher load of 120. An additional staffing allocation is provided to schools based on the percentage of students eligible for free and reduced-price meals (FRM) in the form of needs-based staffing and the number of students receiving English for Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL) services, and these programs and their related expenditures are detailed separately in the program budget. Ratio-based formulas are also used to allocate other positions to schools. The School Board approved staffing formulas are available in the Appendix.”

            Ibid., at page 49.

            Page 113. “Needs-Based Staffing provides variable levels of additional staffing at the elementary, middle, and high school levels
            based on the number and percentage of students eligible for free and reduced-price meals (FRM). In FY 2020, it is projected that 29.2 percent of FCPS students will be eligible for FRM. Families qualifying for FRM must meet established federal guidelines of income and household size. Additional staffing is allocated primarily as teacher positions and principals have flexibility in determining how needs-based staffing will be utilized.”

            The same page shows FCPS is spending an extra $58,512,736 on
            543.3 positions for “needs based staffing.” $53 million of which comes from local taxes.

            These schools get additional psychologists, as shown on page 184.

            “Services from school psychologists may be delivered through direct contact with the student or indirectly through consultation with staff and parents/guardians, through in-service trainings and presentations, and through collaboration with public and private practitioners and agencies. Assignment of psychologists to schools is based on multiple variables including but not limited to English for Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL) enrollment,
            percentage of free and reduced-price meal eligibility, and the number of students identified as needing support for
            an emotional disability. Psychologists are available to meet with students on an as needed basis to address a known
            concern or a situational stressor, regularly as indicated on an IEP, or for purposes of assessment for special education consideration.”

            Extra social workers are discussed on page 190.

            How can this be? If extra resources are provided, why doesn’t everyone score the same? Of course, many low-income families take great advantage of these additional resources and get good educations. But some don’t. Likewise, some well-to-do families don’t pay attention to their kids. And some “rich” kids screw around and don’t learn much.

            There is other data that I haven’t reviewed yet. But kids in poorer schools get access to more money than kids in wealthier schools.

          4. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            re: ” How can this be? If extra resources are provided, why doesn’t everyone score the same? Of course, many low-income families take great advantage of these additional resources and get good educations. But some don’t. Likewise, some well-to-do families don’t pay attention to their kids. And some “rich” kids screw around and don’t learn much.

            There is other data that I haven’t reviewed yet. But kids in poorer schools get access to more money than kids in wealthier schools.”

            I really do appreciate you going through the info –

            It’s not clear how much “extra staff” is allocated – and what positions specifically but this is for Middle and High school so the positions would need to be remedial.

            The issue is the Elementary schools and especially the ones that serve low-income neighborhoods.

            Finally – it’s not that extra money is allocated – it matters more how much – and for what positions – and in doing so – does it result in better academic performance.

            The thing is that We KNOW that kids ARE helped by tutoring and extra help – it’s proven to work. Rich parents hire tutors to help their kids that are behind – that would be the same parents who supposedly “help” their kids learn while the low-income parents supposedly shirk that responsibility.

            So, let me ask – if each kid from a low-income family got his own tutor – do you think that would be effective? Not all kids would benefit but I bet most would… after all rich folks pay tutors and it must work, right?

            So – are you really looking for answers or just defending the ” we spend more money but it still don’t help” narrative for Conservatives?

  15. LarrytheG Avatar
    LarrytheG

    “Lotteries” are the antithesis to the CONCEPT of ‘equal education” and equity.

    1. Reed Fawell 3rd Avatar
      Reed Fawell 3rd

      “Lotteries” are the antithesis to the CONCEPT of ‘equal education” and equity.”

      Yes, the lottery pool is comprised mostly all of poor disadvantaged kids who winning the lottery each year get a great great education for Free. Those kids who don’t win are fed the wolves of public schools that have been abject failures for generations of kids. The solution that serves all kids to great advantage, giving them equality of opportunity, is to allow Success Academy and all successful charters to accept all kids who want to attend and work hard at those schools. That is equity. That is equal education. That is precisely what the public school administrators and teachers unions will not allow. Why? Because it threatens the existing monopoly that is and has been destroying the education and futures of generations of American children for the past fifty years in many cities.

Leave a Reply