The Boondoggle of School Choice
The summer before my freshman year of high school, my suburban school district decided to implement a new school choice program developed for the state of Massachusetts. It is a program-limited choice similar to many others around the country. Schools offer a certain number of spaces in each class for "choice students," that is, students from other towns who wish to attend the school. Students apply and enter a random lottery system. If they are chosen, they become legally-enrolled students at the new school. The costs of the program are covered by the child's hometown or subsidized by the state.
The logic of the program (and all other choice programs) is that it offers students the ability to attend better schools than those in their hometowns. School choice is lauded as the great white hope of American education. "Let's give those kids a chance!" "Let's take control of our children's education!" Supporters claim that school choice will not only save our students, but it will also save our schools. Schools will be forced to improve their programs to remain competitive. Soon, all students will be attending the schools they want to, and all schools will be worthy of their students. School choice is the panacea for the problems of American education.
Or at least that's what the proponents of the program tell us. Unfortunately, they leave out a few crucial points. School choice will not be the saving of the American mind. It is a desperate attempt to patch up the problems of our system by offering a few students a new option and calling it salvation. One is reminded of a great juggling act, where if a few students are shuffled around, we may not notice the others falling to the ground. Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain . . .
Let me stress that I am not speaking as a bitter product of the system who feels that school choice has hurt her educational experience. When it was first installed in our school, a number of parents, students and community members were outraged. They took a "not in my backyard" approach to the situation, bemoaning the influx of students from "bad schools." They thought that the innocence of our town would be lost, as students who were different from our sheltered community were admitted.
There has been a lot of controversy over this issue mainly because of the importance of an education in a modern society. School choice initiatives are based on the premise that allowing parents to choose what schools their children attend is not only the right thing to do, but is also an important way for improving education. Instead of a one-size-fits-all model, School choice programs offer parents various options from which to pick the educational settings they believe will work best for their child. However, there is
One of the most pressing issues facing the United States today is its failing educational system. While many solutions have been proposed, the idea of charter schools has been both popular and controversial. The topic of charter schools is being debated in as many places as local school board meetings to state supreme courts. Though on the surface, charter schools seem like an exciting and promising step for the future of education in America, they are not the answer to this country’s ever-increasing educational problems. Charters will drain already scarce funding from regular public schools, and many of the supposed “positives” surrounding them are uncertain and unpredictable at best.
As a student at a special admissions public school I was very aware of the problems that existed at my school, but also took for granted the advantages my school had over "regular" public schools. Our ceiling was falling down, we had no windows or ventilation, and we had teachers that didn't teach, but we also had a computer network, beautiful grand pianos, small classes, a Jazz Chorus that took a trip to Europe, AP courses, and a ridiculous number of graduates attending Ivy League universities. Some of the "regular" public schools might have had windows, but that was really the only advantage, after that we had them beat by quite a lot.
Even with the negative and positive functions of No Child Left Behind, there are many areas that still need to ironed out. Under the Obama administration several states have received a waiver from No Child Left Behind, “with this waiver students will still be tested annually. But starting this fall, schools in those states will no longer face the same prescriptive actions spelled out under No Child Left Behind” (Feller & Hefling, 2012). Since 2007, the law has been up for review, but due to opponents of the law there has not been an agreement reached and the law continues to stress our schools and children out. We can only hope that when this law is reviewed and agreed upon that it really is in the best interest of our children and the nation as a whole.
The implementation of the No Child Left Behind Act applied a market approach to school reform as a way of improving the school system. This new law promised an era of high standards, testing, and accountability in
Why would anyone wish to withhold support for a program that has the potential to revolutionize the, often, insufficient American education system? This question has undoubtedly entered the mind of proponents of education voucher systems across the country. However, despite the pressure placed on legislators everywhere, close scrutiny of the real issues should not be clouded by public fervor. It is my belief that, after a thorough examination of the merits of such programs, school vouchers would be a gross detriment to both the American education system and the nation itself.
Schools may not be equally available to all students and thereby result in unequal treatment for those not eligible to attend or not selected. Public schools could become "dumping grounds" if the "good" students were to leave and go to charter schools. The drain of funds from the public schools could also present a problem. Transportation issues would arise as well as a reexamination of state athletic association rules and regulations. Choices to attend may not be made on the basis of attending a better school or district but because the school is closer to childcare, it's perceived as easier, more convenient or has better extracurricular activities. Lawsuits could arise due to the fact that the schools would make promise regarding school performance and/or educational offerings that might not materialize. Schools could file for bankruptcy. Other issues include possible discrimination toward students and violation of state of federal laws.
My perspective on the decision on the policy is that it lacks careful thinking by the law-makers. If students perform different, why use just one variable to test them. It’s like hoping that you are going to produce all children that are exactly the same quality. Or a school can be an excellent school but is seen as not making adequate annual progress under the provisions of “No Child Left
In the critique of pure reason, Kant states, “All alternations occur in accordance with the law of the connection of cause and effect.”1 This statement is interpreted in two different ways: weak readings and strong readings. Weaker readings basically suggest that Kant's statement only refers to “All events have a cause”; however, the strong readings suggest that “the Second Analogy is committed not just to causes, but to causal laws as well.”2 To understand the difference between the readings, it is helpful to notice Kant's distinction between empirical laws of nature and universal transcendental principles. Empirical laws have an empirical element that universal transcendental principles cannot imply. On the other hand, empirical experiences require necessity to become a law, accordingly, “the transcendental laws “ground” the empirical laws by supplying them with their necessity.”3In this paper, according to this distinction, I first, argue that the second analogy supports the weak reading, second, show how in Prolegomena he uses the concept of causation in a way that is compatible to the strong reading, and third, investigate whether this incongruity is solvable.
The fine arts were once highly revered by the community and were a part of everyday life, yet today the fine arts must face their biggest competitor, that being sports. Sports have become a big business and many schools find it easier and better to cut arts programs due to low funding rather than athletic programs. Even though fine arts programs are not as profitable as athletic programs, they should be funded equally to athletic programs because they help student achievement, help students improve their cognitive skills, and encourage creativity.
First of all, the children are demonstrating a a level of academic achievement so there was a lot of effort put into their work to get into a good college. instead of children doing wrong they will be off the streets getting a good education and working hard to better themselves. Just think about how the rate of homeless would change. Children with a 3.0 GPA that have worked hard to maintain grades should be able to get free college tuition. Just think about how the number of students attending college will increase in a good way. It hard to think about many children grow up and dream about what they want to be but its all thrown away
In the 1990’s the school choice movement gained momentum through John E. Chubb and Terry M. Moe’s bold assumption that “school choice would make it possible to break the iron grip of the adult interest group, unleash the positive power of competition, and achieve academic excellence” (Ravitch 118). Many advocates for school choice share a similar belief in the positive effect school choice and competition create in schools. When comparing the statistics to this notion, however, one finds an opposite conclusion than the one proposed. The school choice approach and the importance of competition in schools generates a stress on both charter schools and district schools to feature high-achieving students and dismiss
Public School Choice is an easy program to understand and it contains many advantages but also many disadvantages. Public School Choice is when parents can elect to send their children out of a school that has not made adequate yearly progress for two consecutive years into a school that has made progress. (McClure, 2002) If there are no available schools within the original school district, then a family can choose to send their children to another district. This only happens when the other schools in the original district are all labeled as ‘underachieving schools’ and have not made the adequate yearly progress. (McClure, 2002)
The Public Choice For some parents, deciding on a school for their children can be a difficult decision. Many parents do not spend much time thinking about it; they place their children into the local school designated by where they live. Others attended a private school themselves and found that it was a beneficial experience and therefore want the same for their kids. But which is better: private schools or public schools? While there are many advantages and disadvantages to each (nothing is going to be absolutely perfect), we are going to focus on the benefits of an education in the public school system, or in other words, schools funded by the government that are for anyone to attend.
Many people in today’s society believe it’s wise to send their children to private schools. In making the decision on whether to put children in public or private schools, they look to four main factors: curriculum, class size, the graduation rate, and cost. When people have to pay for something, their first thought is, “Will I be getting what I’m paying for?” With a private school education, the amount you have to pay is usually well worth it. Public schools offer diversity. Here students can find people who are just like them and can associate better. Wherever you live, you have to send your child to the closest school. There’s no choice on what public school you can send your child to, whereas for private schools you can pick to send your child there. It’s not an easy choice for parents to decide, but many factors point toward a guarantee that a good education would be achieved, which is most important.