DebateGate
General Category => 3DHS => Topic started by: Christians4LessGvt on May 20, 2015, 07:35:11 AM
-
NUMBER OF HOMESCHOOLED CHILDREN SOARS IN AMERICA:
UP 61.8% OVER 10 YEARS
by DR. SUSAN BERRY
19 May 2015
Newly released data from the U.S. Department of Education shows that between 2003-2012, the number of American children between ages 5 to 17 who are homeschooled has risen 61.8 percent, and that the percentage homeschooled in that age range has increased from 2.2 to 3.4 percent.
According to data published on May 7 by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), in 2003 1,096,000 school-aged children were homeschooled in the U.S., representing 2.2 percent of the total number of students in that age range that year. In 2012, the number homeschooled was 1,773,000, or 3.4 percent of elementary and secondary school-aged children that year.
The increase in the number of children homeschooled between 2003 and 2012 is 677,000, or 61.8 percent.
As CNS News.com observes, "The 677,000 increase in homeschooled students from 2003 to 2012 is more than the populations of Memphis (653,450), Seattle (652,405), Boston (645,966) and Washington, D.C. (646,449)."
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/05/19/number-of-homeschooled-children-soars-in-america-up-61-8-over-10-years/
-
This is hardly a good thing.
Not all, and probably not most, parents are capable of educating their children.
Is is a good idea to have thiusands of citizens who think that Jesus is coming next Tuesday and who think that the world is 4000 years old and that modern science is false and a fraud?
Because that is where home schooling gets you if the parents are fundamentalists. Ignorant hicks we have too many of already.
-
Where as public school gets you propagandized drones, supportive of leftist causes & Government control. Oh wait, that's a good thing, right?
-
I see no evidence of this.
I have seen some really ignorant HS graduates, but most of them are utterly clueless about any sort of politics. If they are drones of anyone, it would be Drones of Eminem or Kanye West
-
I see no evidence of this.
Of course not. Your blinders are faithfully afixed. Alas some students do manage to develop their own sense of right and wrong outside of the Public school systems and teachers' unions attempt to accomplish
-
I have taught in unionized high schools in WA, MD and FL, and NEVER have I seen anything from any union group telling any teacher what to teach.
There are some parents who are qualified to teach their own kids. There are a lot of them who are not.
It is one thing to know stuff and quite another to be able to get children interested in learning it.
Charter school are also a mixed bag. Some are better than the public schools, others are just a ruse for a bunch of people who know NOTHING about education rip off the public. Read about the sad fate of the Liberty City Charter School that Jebbie Bush helped to start. It closed down after three years or so.
In Florida, the state does not have any requirements for who can run a charter school. Ex cons, convicted flimflam men, unschooled preachers all have started these and many have failed. The one thing that all the charter schools I know about have in common is that the adminostratoirs are paid three or four times as much as in the public schools, and the teachers are lucky to earn even half.
-
I have taught in unionized high schools in WA, MD and FL, and NEVER have I seen anything from any union group telling any teacher what to teach.
It's implied...which can be validated by the ongoing examples I've seen by students who secretly videotape some teacher going onto some anti-Republican rant, Anti-Bush rant, Pro-Global warming rant, etc. And if the students don't comply...so much for your GPA
-
You are an ignorant asshole. Nothing like this ever happens.
-
Blinders still firmly affixed
-
There is nothing to see. You make up imaginary shit and blame me for not seeing it.
-
Nothing like this ever happens
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qxZ-eYRPEdE
-
Again, not every parent is a fit teacher, and some of them are just awful.
The schools in the prosperous school districts are very good, those in poor neighborhoods are generally worse.
-
So much for the idea that "nothing like this ever happens"
-
Parents who are able should not be prevented from teaching their children.
There are probably many more than 5% of us able to teach our own children.
-
The percentage that can do a decent job is not the issue. The issue is whether all the parents who are homeschooling are capable, and that is less probable.
-
Don't call it improbable , no one needs to guess.
Homeschooling has a good success rate , this is established , why speak of probability?
-
I do not think they have the proper tools to evaluate home schooling. Some states give some tests, other states give other tests.
Th get a HS diploma, students in public schools must pass a test that included math, reading comprehension and basic knowledge.
Home schoolers, charter schoolers and private schoolers do not need to take the test.
There were private for-profit groups that advertise "GED in three months, no FCAT".
Maybe other states evaluate them adequately, but Florida does not.
Some homeschoolers get a really good education, others do not.
-
Just like many Public schoolers get a good education, while many do not. Anyone seen the latest test results from the Los Angeles Unified School District?
-
Are the homeschooling their students? If not, why bring it up?
It is irrelevant to the argument, which seems to be that more parents should homeschool their children, and that is true for some but not all, and there are no valid statistics to judge, and therefore it cannot be compared with Los Angeles Schools.
-
The arguement is that Home schooling should not be inhibited or prevented. Nor is it an arguement that more parents "should" homeschool their children. The arguement is the freedom of choice, that parents, should they want to homeschool their children, would not have some blankent condemnation that since some home schooling may occur in some "backwoods hick region of the country", that homeschooling in general should be avoided, if not abolished. Public education is just as bad, if not worse, when it comes to educating our children. Especially in places like LAUSD, where Public Education and Teachers' Unions reign supreme
It's funny, how the supposed party of "choice", is so anti-choice to anything that isn't supportive of Government services
-
Some people perhaps should homeschool their children.
Others should not.
There, argue against that.
-
One more time...its not an arguement about should....its an argument about being allowed
-
Did I ever say it should not be allowed?
Did I?
-
No, you keep arguing that folks like myself & Plane say more people should be home schooled. That's what YOU keep saying. Speaking for myself, it's not an issue that more children should be home schooled, and never has been
-
Observe that CU starts this nonsense by declaring "Hopefully this trend continues". What trend? the trend to homeschool children,ie to homeschool MORE of them. Look up the word "trend".
-
For a lingustics professor, you really have a problem with words and their definitions. A trend where more kids are getting a better education is a good thing. That's something that SHOULD be supported. No where in there however is the proclamation that kids SHOULD be homeschooled, and to avoid any other means of education
The point Plane & I were taking, was along the lines of squelching this knee jerk dislike the left has of any education that occurs outside of Public Education. There are bad homeschooled students, just as there are bad publically educated students.
I support any and all endeavors to educate our children, be it Public, Private, Charter, Homeschooled, etc. I will also highlight where they are failings, and currently there's some major failings in the Public Education System.....especially in those Union dominated regions, where the emphasis isn't about educating the Child but protecting the Public Education teacher
-
TREND means that what there once was some of, there now is MORE of.
CU wants more homeschooling.
Maybe it would be a good idea, most likely not. It depends on who the parents are.
I would not homeschool my children, because I think that they need to come in contact with other children and socialize to develop their skills with other people.
I do not believe that there are any figures showing that homeschooling is always better or always worse. If the parents are Jehovah's Witlesses or members of some other nutball fundie sect, they have a right to homeschool their kids, but the results are not going to be good for the children. I suppose in an Amish community, they would get along just fine, so long as they stay in that community.
-
If the parents are Jehovah's Witlesses or members of some other nutball fundie sect, they have a right to homeschool their kids, but the results are not going to be good for the children. I suppose in an Amish community, they would get along just fine, so long as they stay in that community.
This is a value judgment that the government should not be making.
-
I do not think they have the proper tools to evaluate home schooling. Some states give some tests, other states give other tests.
The tools are the same as for kids emerging from public school.
There are a much smaller number of homeschooled , but the number that do well on college admission tests is high.
This does not really demonstrate that homeschooling is high standard. Just that the standard of education available at public school is not really hard to surpass .
-
TREND means that what there once was some of, there now is MORE of.
CU wants more homeschooling.
He wants our kids to be better educated, and if there's a trend that homeschooling is doing that, THAT'S A GOOD THING
Maybe it would be a good idea, most likely not. It depends on who the parents are.
Ditto regarding Public schooling, though that largely depends on who the teachers are, and their motivations.
I would not homeschool my children, because I think that they need to come in contact with other children and socialize to develop their skills with other people.
Fine....that's your choice. THAT'S THE POINT. It's about the freedom to choose what you think best for your child....NOT what's best for the school system or teachers. Some parents might think their child will get plenty of socialization outside of school hours, and would rather focus their learning efforts in a setting where they can concentrate much better. The point is, that'd be their choice
-
My problem with this subject is not how successful home schooling is but the blatant disregard of the success rate of public schools . San francisco has three magnet schools but hearing people talk it sounds like public schools in the whole country has 100% failure rate. If i were to say that crzay statement im pretty i get alot of agreements.
-
I wouldn't be one of those, Kimba. I would be one of those that does see & a witness to a factual decline in Public Education results, while at the same time seeing a trend of improving homeschooling results. That's not a blanket condemnation of Public Education, no more than some claim that we should all be home schooled. Merely pointing out the current "trends"
-
I can honestly say for the past few decades zero credit for anything on public education . I understand trends and do acknowledge decline in some schools but refuse to say all schools. from where I stand all these complaints has never brought a suggestion of fixing but more for abandoning these schools and sending SOME kids to alternatives.
I have no problems with charters schools but people forget unlike a public school they are not required to accept all students. home schooling is a purely voluntary system and needs no endorsement whatsoever. I don`t recall parents being forbidden from using it. but it should never be for everyone, we`re talking about a serious tie up of family resources here.
basicly home school is definitely not for the poor
-
I refuse to say all schools as well. It gets very irritating when I see blanket condemnations placed on some aspect of life, based on the actions of a few. That doesn't refute however any trends that are also taking place at the same time, is all I'm saying
-
most Asian student go to public school. If public school is such a failure than doesn`t that mean Asian kids are poor students also?
-
And who's saying Public school is "such a failure"?
-
isn`t that the current theme of home school parents. in fact the whole topic of education is to put down public education. I did state I never once anything positive for the past few decades. I think I`m the only guy defending that it still has merit.
-
It might be...which is what led them to want to homeschool their children. Are we supposed to condemn them for what they perceive? I think its great that your area has some magnet schools, Kimba. Southern CA however, led by the mighty LAUSD has an abysmal record in educating the children. Would you deny that those parents might come to the rational conclusion that Public Education has failed their children?
And no, you're not the only one. The Professor has been doing his darndest to diss homeschooling as a bunch of hick whack jobs
-
http://www.dumbingofage.com/comics/2010-09-22-socialized.png
(http://www.dumbingofage.com/comics/2010-09-22-socialized.png)
-
There are THOUSANDS of public schools in the US. Some are excellent, some are essentially baby sitting services.
They are best in prosperous neighborhoods where nmost of the parents are also well educated, They are worst in poor neighborhoods in which the parents are poorly educated.
Poverty is less of a contributing factor with many Asians, including Koreans, Japanese and Han Chinese, because of the reverence and respect that parents in these communities have for education, which is different from other groups, including the descendents of rural African Americans, American Indians, some Hispanics and some rural immigrants from Southeast Asia, such as Hmong and Cambodians.
Homeschooling follows a similar pattern: the wealthier and better educated the parents are, the better the education tends to be.
-
in matters of bad education their plenty of blame for everybody instead of squarely on the school and the system. not publicly acknowledge but a fair amount of people prefer education to be highly limited. history,language,social studies,all the sciences, etc. is considered unneeded in school.
-
CU wants more homeschooling
I want more of whatever takes children away from leftist indoctrination.
Two of my nieces home-school...
the one in Manhattan Beach, CA
just had her 16 year old start college.
-
Leftist?
Thats just a political opinion. Has no baring on education. Meaning depending what leaning in the area you can effect what education on what relative you desire. I don't blame poltics on this matter . A parent who complains the curriculum is too hard for thier child is likely equally blamed on both parties. You'll be hard press to say you're party want a higher quality to the point willing to have your child flunk.
So i blame parents not polical party.
-
Fundamentalists are far more likely to brainwash their kids than any leftists are.
The problem with education has very little to do with politics. It has to do with kids that never read books and cannot do math.
Students get promoted from one grade to the next even though they do not know the subject.
Miami Dade Schools, when I taught there for a semester had this rule that you could not fail more than 6% of the students in your class without submitting an eight page form explaining why the kid had a learning disability.
Most did not have any learning disability: they cut class, they never turned in the homework, they did not study.
-
We all have our own ideas how education should be run but it's not a one size fit all situation. My take on the issue firstly it is not a voluntary institution and should not ever get direct feedback from parents ever. Kids are made to go there. I do believe teachers need to make the material learnable so the most kids will learn.
Also like all government institutions it should get some oversight on the finances. We never hear of aidts being finished and finances are all accountable
-
Keeping in mind, as it relates to propagandizing, so much easier when you have a captive audience, say .....a classroom, vs one student in his/her home with ideological parents
-
Pretty much means little. At that volume the effects are pretty much minimul. Remember it's not voluntarily meaning the subltle stuff gets lost in the kids head
-
Pretty much means little.
Not to me. If folks want to lay claim to how potentially problematic it is for 1 student to be "brainwashed", by parents being home schooled. I'd counter that with the plethora of examples we have of leftist teachers & professors, openly pushing their ideals & politics, who have have the superior advantage of volume, and as noted prior, a captive audience.
-
I doubt that you even attended a college, you know so bloody little about them. Judging from your warped understanding of American history and politics, if anyone did attempt to proselytize you, you are walking proof of their utterly miserable failure.
-
Professor wrong, strikes again. Though I do appreciate the notion that kids can fight back and not be made to be sheep to follow the whims of whatever socialist is in power. Be it teacher or President 8)
-
Socialist ,liberal.
Aleays found it funny the two are considered similiar. As a chinese i actually kniw many communist and every single one of them is conservative due to similiar beliefs.
I've always said the high majority of people are by narure conservative but due to literally one or two small details the conservatives party tend to turn thier own people to the otherside
-
Pretty much means little.
well good for you Kimba! But my nieces and nephews won't be learning the "gospel" of
faux man made global warming, the history of America being "evil", and the pro-homo agenda...
but again what it's all about is...2EachHisF-ingOwn!
-
Socialist ,liberal.
Aleays found it funny the two are considered similiar.
They truly are, Kimba. A Socialist is merely a liberal on ideological steroids. And i agree with you, that people are naturally, if not raised leaning conservative. Then they hit the Public Education sector, and with the help of the drumbeat of the MSM, all bets are off.
-
Got nothing to do with education. Alot of these folk don't even get u.s. Education . I did state it largely on the shoulder of the conservative party to keep thier numbers and they simply not very good at it.
It's the very reason the term compassionate conservative came about
-
Got nothing to do with education.
You're absolutely right....it doesn't/shouldn't. And yet, its happening...on a daily basis.....across the country....starting as early as grade school. No subject appears to be off limits, including math. The reason those conservative #'s don't stay up is precisely what I just referred to, the opportunity that so many liberal educators have in injecting their ideology into a captive classroom, with the ability to affect FAR more minds, at early ages, than 1 fundamentalist parent can do to 1 child
-
No
The number are down because the conservatives are doing a bad job. Your giving liberal way too much credit . i'll say again most folks are conservative meaning whatever education you are talking about has no baring . I'm stating some of the people who did not receive the liberal education your talking about.
Speaking of math. I remember the very issue that you may of refer to and it's false. Say an equation about dividing item equally amoung people is not communism it just math about division. I believe it same math applied for sevral decades before marx was around.
I started this on the matter schools not getting credit and as such people are writing them off . So it loos like you guys are in agreement all public school are a failure
-
Supporting the ruling government is always conservative, so in China, the Communists are the conservatives. Modern socialism does not support the public ownership of the means of production, other than in areas in which the competitive forces of the market do not exist, like water, electricity, medicine, telecommunications, and the control or actual ownership of natural resources, such as minerals and hydrocarbons.
The main reason for homeschooling is NOT avoidance to the students being indoctrinated, since homeschooling tends to be for younger children, while the horrible propagandizing "Liberal" professors are at the university level. Of course, such evil minds are ineffective when up against geniuses like sirs, who resisted being indoctrinated by his professors of kinesiology and massage therapy. They only manage to indoctrinate lesser minds, that otherwise would be fundamentalists or Republicans.
-
No
The number are down because the conservatives are doing a bad job.
I suppose we're just going to have to agree to disagree on this one, Kimba
I started this on the matter schools not getting credit and as such people are writing them off . So it loos like you guys are in agreement all public school are a failure
And I stated how I get irritated at blanket condemnations for the acts of some. I was so hoping you wouldn't fall into that
-
There are thousands of public schools in the US. Some are excellent, others are horrible, and many are in between.
It is possible to compare RESULTS of student performance on tests,and this is done on a regular basis.
If a school does not share a core curriculum with the rest of the country, then results of tests used to compare different schools will not be valid.
There are thousands of homeschooled students and some turn out with superior educations, others horridly ignorant, with many in between.
The usual reason parents homeschool their children is because they think they can do a better job of it than convenient public and private schools.
The definition of "a good education" varies greatly with the parents.
Homeschooling to avoid "liberal indoctrination" is surely a lesser motive for parents to homeschool their children, just as building bunkers and stocking them with a 30 year supply of food and arsenals of weapons and ammo to prepare for Armageddon/ the collapse of civilization/ etc. is not a very common reaction to the current world political and economic situation.
-
Notice it after i post it my bad.
But your not saying some schools also.
-
If a school does not share a core curriculum with the rest of the country, then results of tests used to compare different schools will not be valid.
There are thousands of homeschooled students and some turn out with superior educations, others horridly ignorant, with many in between.
I bet you haven't looked at the figures.
Homeschooling has a good success rate.
But where the local school is disappointing enough to foster a lot of homeschooling around it , there is an even more marked difference in outcomes .
A school that is failing looses the children and parents who are well motivated first, and these are the ones who homeschool best , so stratification can rapidly snowball.
But lets blame this on the failing school , rather than the highly motivated children and parents.
Where the public schools are not disappointing , I would expect there to be a lot less homeschooling.
-
Not quite that clear cut.
I mention before home schooling is a touch costly . Not all family can do home schooling . I actually do know one parent who home school but wants to enroll thier son to school but he test as three years behind. So he pretty much has to stay home school till he catches up. Also the reason they want to enroll thier son is the workload to teach him has been overwhelming.
im trying to say not all parents can home school .
-
I cannot imagine how there could be accurate statistics on ALL homeschooling.
I can imagine that the parents that are really are good at it are also good at testing and turning in the results.
So the results that are turned in are all great results.
But the more neglectful parents would not be turning in anything, or turning in what they think the state wants to hear.
-
There really is no measure for everything.
But one of the best indicators that is available , is the rates at which they succeed at college.
More than 2 million U.S. students in grades K-12 were home-schooled in 2010, accounting for nearly 4 percent of all school-aged children, according to the National Home Education Research Institute. Studies suggest that those who go on to college will outperform their peers.
Students coming from a home school graduated college at a higher rate than their peers—66.7 percent compared to 57.5 percent—and earned higher grade point averages along the way, according to a study that compared students at one doctoral university from 2004-2009.
They're also better socialized than most high school students, says Joe Kelly, an author and parenting expert who home-schooled his twin daughters.
http://www.usnews.com/education/high-schools/articles/2012/06/01/home-schooled-teens-ripe-for-college
-
Homeschoolers who go to college may or may not be typical of homeschoolers in general.
Whether they are "better socialized" is an opinion, I don't have any idea how this could be measured.
-
Not quite that clear cut.
I mention before home schooling is a touch costly . Not all family can do home schooling . I actually do know one parent who home school but wants to enroll thier son to school but he test as three years behind. So he pretty much has to stay home school till he catches up. Also the reason they want to enroll thier son is the workload to teach him has been overwhelming.
im trying to say not all parents can home school .
http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=372
Right now there are about two million homeschooled kids.
Of the population this is less than 1%.
Of the school age population it is slightly better than 2%.
The problem as I see it is that our schools are so cruddy that it produces only about one to two percent of us who are smart and knowledgeable enough to teach a child elementary knowledges.
-
I did mentioned that school are at the whims of parents desire what is taught to to ensure thier child will graduate so again the blame cannot be soully on the shoulder of the school alone.
The cruddy school did not make these parent it's actually a constant element through out time.
I did point out it's in our culture. Ex. English only
That statement alone has allow asian student who maintain thier birth language graduate ate a higher rate.
In the future i'll never use algebra. A movie quote about somebody in the fifties. All non public schools do not have this issue. But public schools are uniquely vulnerable to the whims and notions of the parents.
Public school is the only option for the economic disadvantaged. Home school is not an option for those.
-
.......................
In the future i'll never use algebra. A movie quote about somebody in the fifties. All non public schools do not have this issue. But public schools are uniquely vulnerable to the whims and notions of the parents.
Public school is the only option for the economic disadvantaged. Home school is not an option for those.
If you design electronic circuits you will use algebra quite a bit.
Somebody ought to mention this to the kids when they start, yes it is relevant.
The overall cost of homeschool is low , less than public school.
But we all pay for the public school , even us that would rather use the competition.
A voucher system would open the world of education to the poor .
Those against vouchers are favoring a monopoly.
-
Not just talking money. Im taking it ties up one parent from earning an income so it's pretty much for household who can afford to live on one income.
The problem with vouchers is the school still has to accept the kid. Doesn't charter have veto power which is one of the factors that make it superior to public school.
One of the factor why public school has a decline is that it cannot turn kids away.these are not motivated students
-
Vouchers are a TERRIBLE idea.
As soon as the government okayed loans and grants to students of unaccredited, private schools, these things popped up all over the place, and most of them are diploma mills that do not prepare their graduates for real jobs. Some of them spend more on recruiting and advertising than they do on instruction. Much of the instruction is online, where the students can simply fake having learned the material. All exams are open book exams. What the private schools really like is that student loans cannot be cancelled by bankruptcy, making them easy to sell to loan vultures who will harass the debtors until their last Social Security check.
Everest University and its parent, Corinthian Colleges, has recently gone out of business. Most of their students never got useful degerees in anything, but they all racked up huge piles of debt.
These fly by night colleges get away with it because they donate huge amounts to politicians.
If vouchers are issued for elementary and HS education, the same creeps will grab the voucher money and deliver crap, just as they did in higher education.
Homeschooling is okay for the few parents who are qualified to do it: give them a financial incentive and it will multiply the number of scams.
-
I actually don't have a problem with vouchers since public schools are notoriously overcrowded. So it's a way to bring down the class size.
True public school gets funding from large class sizes but that mean they will finally redo thier books to handle it.
I've always been critical of the finances of many of the public schools. I feel like I'm the only who says public schools gets alot of money
-
If there is not enough money to teach students in one school, it is not going to cost less to teach them in two.
Charter schools have proven to be no better than public ones, and they are inferior in that they are permitted to keep problem students out, they are not obliged to pay their teachers according to any publicly revealed pay schedule or provide benefits for them at all, and can graduate students without their having to prove they have the same minimal knowledge as public schools. Convicted felons can own the facilities they operate in and have done this.
Vouchers MIGHT be an improvement, but because the private school lobbyists will write the laws governing them, this is very unlikely.
-
Except of course when it has been tried, it has been extremely successful.....which is why the teachers union lobbyists get their money's worth in the politicians they've bought and paid for, who then axe actual successful efforts at educating our children. Can't be having anything competing with the Public Education teachers.....big no no
-
Successful??
I've seen several charters school shut due to child endangerment charges. Remember they get way less oversight than public schools. Not saying all but the small percentage are fairly scarey.
Charter school is a misleading word. By nature they not alike some are acedemic utopia but most are not.
Im mixed about the teachers union. I believe they need some leeway to explore the best way to teach thier class but not to the point they don't need teacher well at all. Very confused on the subject. Over all i defend teachers and blame parents due to our anti-education culture that is globally common and not a byproduct of public education
-
Vouchers have been tried, and have generally sucked.
-
Successful??
YES.... Successful
The Power of Parental Choice (http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10000872396390444184704577585582150808386)
A Generation of School-Voucher Success
African-American kids in New York were 24% more likely to attend college if they won a scholarship to attend private school.
By
Matthew M. Chingos And Paul E. Peterson
Aug. 23, 2012
President Barack Obama last month signed an executive order promising to "improve outcomes and advance educational opportunities for African Americans." The order instructs federal agencies to "promote, encourage, and undertake efforts" to increase "college access, college persistence and college attainment for African American students." Unfortunately, his administration remains opposed to the Opportunity Scholarship program in Washington, D.C., which lets students—mostly low-income and African-American—use a voucher to attend a private school.
Perhaps Mr. Obama will reconsider his position on vouchers now that we have for the first time tracked the impact of a voucher program all the way from kindergarten (in 1997) to college enrollment (in 2011). Our study compared students who won a voucher lottery with students who didn't—the only difference between the groups was the luck of the draw, the gold standard in research design.
The study shows that an African-American student who was able to use a voucher to attend a private school was 24% more likely to enroll in college than an African-American student who didn't win a voucher lottery.
The voucher program took place in New York City. Its impetus came in 1996, when Archbishop John J. O'Connor invited New York City schools Chancellor Rudy Crew to "send the city's most troubled public school students to Catholic schools." When Mayor Rudolph Giuliani attempted to fund the initiative out of city funds, he encountered strong opposition from those who saw it as a violation of the First Amendment's establishment clause (an argument subsequently rejected by the Supreme Court in other cases). As the controversy raged, a group of private philanthropists—including prominent Wall Street figures Bruce Kovner, Roger Hertog and Peter Flanagan—created the New York School Choice Scholarships Foundation.
The foundation offered three-year scholarships—that is, vouchers—worth up to $1,400 annually (in 1998 dollars) to approximately 1,000 low-income families with children of elementary-school age. A recipient could attend any of the hundreds of private schools, religious or secular, in New York City. The city's largest provider of private schooling was the Catholic archdiocese, which reported average tuition at the time of $1,728 per year. Total expenditures at these schools, from all revenue sources, came to $2,400 per pupil (compared to total costs of more than $5,000 per pupil in the public schools). Over 20,000 applicants participated in the lottery.
Of the 2,666 students in the original study, necessary information was available for over 99%. To see whether those who won the lottery were more likely to go to college, we linked student Social Security numbers and other identifying characteristics to college enrollment data available from the National Student Clearinghouse, which collects that information from institutions of higher education attended by 96% of all U.S. students. We know of no other voucher study that has been as successful at tracking students over such a long period of time.
Although our study identified no significant impact on college enrollments among Hispanic students (and too few white and Asian students participated for us to analyze), the impact on African-American students was large. Not only were part-time and full-time college enrollment together up 24%, but full-time enrollment increased 31% and attendance at selective colleges (enrolling students with average SAT scores of 1100 or higher) more than doubled, to 8% from 3%.
These impacts are especially striking given the modest costs of the intervention: only $4,200 per pupil over a three-year period. This implies that the government would actually save money if it introduced a similar voucher program, as private-school costs are lower than public-school costs. To get a similar (19%) increase in college enrollment among African-Americans from a class-size reduction effort in Tennessee in the late 1980s, the public-school system had to spend $9,400 per pupil (in 1998 dollars).
The difference in the effects for African-American and Hispanic students is probably due to the greater educational challenges faced by the African-Americans. Only 36% of them went to college if they didn't receive a voucher, compared to 45% of the Hispanic students.
President Obama is certainly correct to identify the particularly steep educational barriers that African-American students must surmount if they are to become college-ready. And he seems to have nothing against private school per se, as he has long sent his own daughters to private schools. Yet—apparently thanks to opposition to vouchers from powerful teachers unions—the president still hasn't taken the next step and helped open private-school doors for low-income children as well.
"I have an 8-year-old in third grade, and she's doing great. It's miraculous the way she has changed," said a voucher-winning African-American mother at a focus group session in 1999. The cause of the change was clear. It came from the power of parental choice in education. It wasn't "miraculous"—unless you happen to be one of the parents directly involved.
(and again, isn't ironic that the so-called party of "choice" is so anti-choice when it comes to anything that might weaken Public School Teacher power and monopoly on educating children)
-
The only reason they do this is because they know how much assholes like you love irony.
-
That makes about as much sense......as the rest of your snark riddled diatribes......as in none. Oh, and be sure to keep ignoring the point being made. Need to stay consistent now
-
Hey i just looked up home school and i totally forgot that a percent of them partially goes to regular school to cover subject not hard to be teached by the parent. So schools are still needed if the student needs to go for more challenging pursuits.
But I'm sure they need to pretested to ensure they can handle the courses. Remember i know one kid who couldn't make it to public school less he want to be hold back three grades.