Support NeoGAF

[Piecake]

The nation’s capital is the only city in the country where the federal government gives scholarships to underprivileged children to attend private schools. The goal of the voucher program, of course, is to help ensure low-income youth aren’t tethered to their often under-resourced and under-performing neighborhood schools.

But a report released Thursday found largely negative results for students who participated in the District of Columbia’s Opportunity Scholarship Program, suggesting that many of the program’s beneficiaries might actually fare better if they turn down the private-school money.

The Institute of Education Sciences (IES) compared test scores for two groups of students: students who, through a lottery process, were selected to receive vouchers, and students who applied for yet didn’t receive them. The study compared the progress of both groups of students from spring of 2012 to 2014 and found that, a year after they applied for the scholarship, math scores were lower for students who won vouchers. What’s more, after narrowing the pool of students down to those in kindergarten through fifth grade, both reading and math scores were lower for students who won vouchers.

DeVos, however, wasn’t discouraged by the latest findings, releasing a statement on Thursday indicating she hadn’t shifted her views after reviewing them. “D.C.’s traditional public schools have not suffered as a result of being part of a system that allows choice,” she said. “Rather, they have greatly improved since the 2004 inception of the District of Columbia Opportunity Scholarship Program (OSP). The study released today found that D.C. OSP parents overwhelmingly support this program, and that, at the same time, these schools need to improve upon how they serve some of D.C.’s most vulnerable students. We should demand excellence from all of our nation’s schools, regardless of their type. This Administration remains committed to fully funding D.C. OSP so that D.C.’s most vulnerable students have access to the widest array of education options possible.”

There’s nothing in the report that supports DeVos’s assertion that parents overwhelmingly support the program. Rather, it found “the program did not have a statistically significant impact on parents’ or students’ general satisfaction with the school the child attended.” The study did produce some positive findings: For example, parents of children who used school vouchers were were more likely to say that their child’s school was safe, and the parents of participating children in sixth grade or higher were more likely than those of nonparticipating children to engage in education-related activities at home. But “overwhelming” support for the voucher program itself was not indicated in the IES report.

DeVos has advocated for school choice, citing American students’ slow progress on national and international assessments as an argument against the status quo. She’s also indicated a reluctance to tie success in schools to empirical numbers, instead championing the idea of empowering parents to make the right decisions for their children. “I’m not a numbers person in the same way you are,” she reportedly told a researcher in late March. “But to me, the policies around empowering parents and moving decision-making to the hands of parents on behalf of children is really the direction we need to go.”

https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2017/04/do-vouchers-actually-work/524676/

 

[The Technomancer]

Invest

in

public

education

you

idiots

 

[Guevara]

It's not about teaching kids to read and do math.

It's about "options" and "choice" and "freedom" and money obviously

 

[Magwik]

Invest

in

public

education

you

idiots

DeVos tried her best to destroy Michigan public education and succeeded, so expect that on a national level.

It's not about teaching kids to read and do math.

It's about "options" and "choice" and "freedom" and money obviously

School "choice" means leaving the inner city kids with nothing. If a school isn't doing well you obviously don't invest in bettering education you just let the parents move then unilaterally to a school that performs just a poorly but costs them thousands dollars more.

 

[shiftplusone]

DeVos, however, wasn’t discouraged by the latest findings, releasing a statement on Thursday indicating she hadn’t shifted her views after reviewing them. “D.C.’s traditional public schools have not suffered as a result of being part of a system that allows choice,” she said. “Rather, they have greatly improved since the 2004 inception of the District of Columbia Opportunity Scholarship Program (OSP). The study released today found that D.C. OSP parents overwhelmingly support this program

At least she's on brand with this current fuckhead administration


"I know the results say its bad but people who have no clue what they're talking about are on board so it's a good thing"

 

[yyr]

In other news, water is wet.

 

[Schnozberry]

It's not about teaching kids to read and do math.

It's about "options" and "choice" and "freedom" and money obviously

My wife is was a public school teacher in Minnesota while we lived there, and is now a 5th grade teacher in a suburb of Austin, TX. She freely admits that their math curriculum has units geared towards teaching kids how to score well on these standardized tests leading up to them, and that these test results are a poor indicator of how well students are learning throughout the year.

The Union she's a part of regularly states that teacher pay should not be structured based around performance on these tests, because they are a poor indicator of overall education value and teacher quality, and also don't really correlate to student success later in life as directly as one might think. I tend to agree with them.

I think judging these voucher programs based on standardized test scores is probably the wrong kind of metric for these programs, because private schools haven't really been under the same kind of pressure to modify curriculum towards the end of improving test scores, and probably don't organize their teaching units around preparing children for specific test question types. There is also the issue of variability in human performance, because the control group in this study that attended public school also saw their test scores go down by a statistically significant margin, just by fewer points than the students who actually made use of their scholarship.

The more interesting figure here is that student and parent happiness with the school they were attending remained flat. It would be interesting to get more detail there, because I'm curious what the motivation was for the parents was for moving their kids to a private school, and if those criteria were met a year later.

 

[sugarhigh4242]

Destroying public education is a bipartisan project. Both parties actively support charter schools. Republicans take it further with the brazen corporate welfare that is school vouchers, which most Democrats oppose. Though some prominent neoliberals like Cory Booker advocate for them:

Unlike the majority of the nation's top Democrats, Booker is a supporter of school voucher programs, which would allow public school students to attend private schools while Newark paid the bill. Booker is a founding member of Educational Excellence for Everyone, a non-profit established in 1999 specifically to promote school choice options such as vouchers.

http://www.nypress.com/the-new-newark/

 

[kirblar]

Invest

in

public

education

you

idiots

Gotta destroy the property tax model to do it.

 

[sugarhigh4242]

Gotta destroy the property tax model to do it.

The property tax model is an issue, but it's not like the federal government doesn't kick significant money to the states. That's how Bush and Obama imposed their curriculum and standardized testing agendas. It's just ridiculous to act like everybody really wants to solve the education crisis but this pesky tax funding model makes it impossible.

 

[UnemployedVillain]

Destroying public education is a bipartisan project. Both parties actively support charter schools. Republicans take it further with the brazen corporate welfare that is school vouchers, which most Democrats oppose. Though some prominent neoliberals like Cory Booker advocate for them:


http://www.nypress.com/the-new-newark/

Supporting charter schools =/= gutting public schools in favor them. Stop trying to play this both sides are the same nonsense. Even I don't think they're across the board bad in all areas. For instance, they can be beneficial in school districts that are already well funded and good, by offering an alternative to standard public education that doesn't negatively affect the normal public schools.

 

[KingK]

Quelle surprise

The property tax model is an issue, but it's not like the federal government doesn't kick significant money to the states. That's how Bush and Obama imposed their curriculum and standardized testing agendas. It's just ridiculous to act like everybody really wants to solve the education crisis but this pesky tax funding model makes it impossible.

Property taxes are, by far, the largest funding source for public schools though. It's fucking stupid for what should be obvious reasons (literally creating a negative feedback loop of poverty) and really needs to be addressed. There's other things you can do to help, but changing the property tax model is probably the biggest.

 

[leatherhat]

Invest

in

public

education

you

idiots

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/us-education-spending-tops-global-list-study-shows/

A few years old, but America routinely spends more per pupil than other, better performing countries.

 

[Darryl M R]

Sending low income students to private schools through a voucher does not change their socio-economic status. Getting thrown into a potentially faster learning environment and expecting to learn how to float doesn't sound that well for grade school students (I think there are successes with low income, big fish-small pond students going to top universities).

The program sounds great, as a parent you think if you can send your child to a private school they should find success easily, but from my experience in college there is a life lesson to be learned with low income students becoming comfortable with themselves and trusting their abilities. I believe a typical college environment foster this growth and allows a student to come to realize their untapped abilities and come to turn with their background.

I recently heard a radio clip promoting the private school voucher program and my hot take was "Wow I wish I heard about that in high school."

My suggestions, local government should focus on bolstering their public schools and charter schools, and close charter schools that are clearly not in the business of providing high quality education.

 

[smokeandmirrors]

Surprise surprise charter schools are a fucking scam.

 

[Dreams-Visions]

Supporting charter schools =/= gutting public schools in favor them. Stop trying to play this both sides are the same nonsense. Even I don't think they're across the board bad in all areas. For instance, they can be beneficial in school districts that are already well funded and good, by offering an alternative to standard public education that doesn't negatively affect the normal public schools.

this.

 

[Sectorseven]

So test scores are lower and parents are happier?

 

[jack_package_200]

Supporting charter schools =/= gutting public schools in favor them. Stop trying to play this both sides are the same nonsense. Even I don't think they're across the board bad in all areas. For instance, they can be beneficial in school districts that are already well funded and good, by offering an alternative to standard public education that doesn't negatively affect the normal public schools.

Thats his entire shtick

 

[Bonen no Max'd]

Surprise surprise charter schools are a fucking scam.

disappointing to see people supporting a vehicle for stealing public money and destroying unions in here

 

[Tripon]

Surprise surprise charter schools are a fucking scam.

This isn't talking about charter schools.

 

[sugarhigh4242]

Quelle surprise


Property taxes are, by far, the largest funding source for public schools though. It's fucking stupid for what should be obvious reasons (literally creating a negative feedback loop of poverty) and really needs to be addressed. There's other things you can do to help, but changing the property tax model is probably the biggest.

I absolutely agree that the property tax funding model is broken and needs reform. I just read the user's post as essentially throwing up hands and saying nothing can be done until this particular problem is addressed. Sorry if that was an unfair reading.

 

[smokeandmirrors]

This isn't talking about charter schools.

It's apart of the whole bullshit voucher system consistently shilled for by republicans. Defund education or do what you can to make it worse and then appeal to the "well the public schools suck here's a voucher for a school of your choice" while funneling money away from communities and into the hands of private organizations.

 

[thehypocrite]

Invest

in

public

education

you

idiots

.

Choice, voucher, charters just feels better for parents without actually being any better for students according to the research.

 

[Tripon]

It's apart of the whole bullshit voucher system consistently shilled for by republicans. Defund education or do what you can to make it worse and then appeal to the "well the public schools suck here's a voucher for a school of your choice" while funneling money away from communities and into the hands of private organizations.

Vouchers don't fund charter schools currently. They have access to public funds by directly applying to the local, county and state agencies.

 

[badcrumble]

Supporting charter schools =/= gutting public schools in favor them. Stop trying to play this both sides are the same nonsense. Even I don't think they're across the board bad in all areas. For instance, they can be beneficial in school districts that are already well funded and good, by offering an alternative to standard public education that doesn't negatively affect the normal public schools.

Private schools have existed for centuries and been part of the American accreditation system since it's existed. There's no reason to give them public funding. And to the extent that they *do* get public funding, they are, yes, negatively affecting the normal public schools.

 

[Piecake]

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/us-education-spending-tops-global-list-study-shows/

A few years old, but America routinely spends more per pupil than other, better performing countries.

A good chunk of that is sports and other extracurricular activities

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2013/10/the-case-against-high-school-sports/309447/

Personally, I think the best way to solve the achievement gap and poor educational outcomes is to get rid of child poverty. No way the Republicans would do that though

 

[sugarhigh4242]

Vouchers don't fund charter schools currently. They have access to public funds by directly applying to the local, county and state agencies.

I don't think smokeandmirrors was saying that. Vouchers and charters are 2 different ways of achieving the "school choice" agenda, which is effectively code for eliminating public education.

 

[KingK]

A good chunk of that is sports and other extracurricular activities

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2013/10/the-case-against-high-school-sports/309447/

Personally, I think the best way to solve the achievement gap and poor educational outcomes is to get rid of child poverty. No way the Republicans would do that though

Yup, that and stop breaking up families with mass incarceration. Childhood poverty rates in America are fucking gross and should be a massive scandal and top priority to address. But (while I generally hate the "both sides" shit because even when democrats suck at something, republicans are a million times worse) almost nobody in either party ever mentions the words poor or poverty. Top priority is always the "middle class." At least rhetorically, in practice it's frequently (or always, in the case of republicans) the wealthy.