Smasharoo wrote:
You're missing my point. We can't agree today on what metrics to use to determine whether an education is good or bad, or what curriculum will be most successful, or even how to measure success. It's why our policies keep shifting over time. Given we can't do this even close to consistently, perhaps the solution is to not have a big bureaucratic government organization try to figure out what will result in the "best education" for every child, and instead let schools try different things, and let parents use their vouchers to choose the ones that they think are the most successful.
Been tried.
When? Do you have a source supporting your claim that we have ever adopted a program in which the public education dollars which would otherwise be funneled directly to K-12 public schools were instead divided up evenly among all parents of school age children so they could choose to spend them on any school they like. I would love to see you support this claim.
Quote:
Fails miserably. MISERABLY.
For the set of all failures caused by never trying in the first place.
Quote:
Basically the reason charter schools became "a thing" was that "school choice" was such an abject failure that it was impossible to even attempt to spin it as valid, so instead of "let the parents choose the best school" the argument became "let's build better schools for parents to choose".
It was only ever tried, much less abjectly failed, in the fertile imaginations of public education advocates so as to sidestep the idea entirely. You can't defend the current system, so you pretend that we already tried the alternative and it just didn't work. Kinda pathetic, but there you have it.
Quote:
All of it is thinly veiled attacks on public employee unions. That's all it's about, it's not a mystery or a debate. Teachers unions vote for Democrats, so Republicans want to destroy teachers unions, all done, that's the whole story.
I think you've got the directionality reversed. Teachers unions vote for Democrats, so Democrats oppose any changes to education which might threaten this cozy arrangement. I do find it interesting that just like Joph, you fear the free choices of the people because you assume it would tip some kind of political balance in favor of the Right. What does it say about our two "sides" that mine is perfectly willing to create a system in which every single parent is free to choose how their education dollars are spent, while your side is not? Why do both of you assume that this change would benefit conservatives? If teachers unions really are the best way to ensure a quality education for students (as is often claimed) then you should not fear this change at all. Parents should choose to send their kids to the unionized schools, right?
I mean, if the odds of my child getting a quality education which will lead to a successful career is greater in schools run by unions, and the cost is otherwise identical, I'm going to choose to send my kid to the union school. Right? Why wouldn't I?
So... doesn't the very fact that you're making the argument suggest that you really believe that unions aren't the best way to educate kids and you know that the only way to force folks to send their kids to union run schools is if you take away their choices. Right? I mean, you've admitted that you see vouchers and free choice as a threat to unions, so it's not like this is a stretch or anything.