Public money for public schools.

Submitted by LetterGrouchy6053 t3_10sobvo in vermont

If one had to point to a single issue as to what made America great, it just might be our public school education system. It guarantees every child the opportunity to advance at one’s own level with no restriction on what one might achieve, providing they have the ability to maintain reasonable standards of productivity.

Even though America’s most challenging period, Jim Crow, when black children were segregated and shunted aside to ‘Separate, but equal’ schools, (Which were separate, but not at all equal) a basic level of learning was realized.

Public funding (tax dollars) provided the wherewithal to fund public schools, and although challenged by problems that beset any large institution it did achieve, according to the Census Bureau, a literacy rate of 86%, at near the top of all the nations of the world.

But now a dual education proposal is challenging the public system all across America; the threat? Vouchers!

The scheme is as simple as this. The proponents intend to siphon off tax dollars meant for public education and divert it to private academies and prep schools that cater to the well-to-do, and the wealthy. They hire public relations firms to concoct ridiculous stories about a grassroots movement supporting the plot, when in fact right-wing plutocrats fund the program in order to further the separations between the rich and the poor.

Each day we read about heroic, underpaid, teachers and administrators reaching into their own pockets just to provide the basics, pencils, and paper, for their already underfunded schools. But now, with pristine arrogance, and even before those items can be procured, they want the public dollars to go to travel lacrosse teams and racing shells for their already privileged children.

And to make matters worse, there is no accountability for those funds. Whereas public schools have to meet certain standards of learning, give tests, adhere to standards, and face sanctions if goals aren’t reached, no such rules apply to most voucher projects.

Public tax dollars for public schools and not for the enrichment of private institutions!

22

Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

Unique-Public-8594 t1_j72i0k4 wrote

This is being spammed to every state sub.

20

random_vermonter t1_j730nal wrote

I've seen a lot of posts with very little, if anything to do with Vermont in the last few days. It's really annoying. If it's not Vermont-specific, why is it posted here?

2

Sparrows_Shadow t1_j7327hx wrote

I am a Vermont educator, and this is a very relevant issue.

28

HappilyhiketheHump t1_j73d85l wrote

Vermont has had vouchers for children for towns that don’t have a high school for many years, and it has worked well.

The Supreme Court said states can’t discriminate against some students by only offering vouchers to a select few.

The education establishment doesn’t want to lose their stranglehold on 2 billion in state spending on preK-12 education that current results in <45% proficiency state wide.

So is this an issue? Yes Are Vermonts children being offered equal access to quality education? No Is the NEA looking out for the best interest of your child? No.

−4

RoyalAntelope9948 t1_j74buo2 wrote

It does have to do with Vermont. We are now paying tax dollars to both private schools as well as religious schools.

6

LetterGrouchy6053 OP t1_j72it2u wrote

It's not spam. It is a relevant topic in many states and I thought I'd enter the dialog.

−10

Unique-Public-8594 t1_j72l63b wrote

It’s not specific to Vermont. Maybe the right place for it is in an education sub? Unlike MSM, Reddit is divided into specific topics.

1

Kink4202 t1_j72uh3r wrote

It's happening in Vermont, so it's relative for the sub

3

NowIAmThatGuy t1_j72yj8w wrote

It’s important to get the language right around this issue. There are private schools who receive public funds due to that private school being the only public option for a specific town(s) and therefore does not represent the specific issue being addressed here around a private school receiving public funds since this private school IS the public option for the town(s). There are, and this is the issue, private schools that receive public dollars and are not open to everyone. Those families argue for choice and they receive a voucher. This voucher money draws away from the publicly available education system that is open to all in that area. I would argue this should not be allowed. But the distinction should be made around this issue as to not lump these two separate uses of public dollars together. One is serving a necessary need in a community and is open to all residents. The other is not serving the same need and is a choice.

15

blE3p_bl00p t1_j746fve wrote

>There are, and this is the issue, private schools that receive public dollars and are not open to everyone. Those families argue for choice and they receive a voucher. This voucher money draws away from the publicly available education system that is open to all in that area.

Say it louder! If you want to go to a snobby school, you shouldn't get public funding.

15

NowIAmThatGuy t1_j752jdr wrote

I might argue that there shouldn’t be any other choice than public school and we should fund them as if they were private schools. Albeit, the research shows that private school educations are not any better than public.

4

landodk t1_j751rox wrote

What if you live in Manchester?

3

SVTer t1_j75387w wrote

You get to go to private school with tax payer dollars. I want in!

1

landodk t1_j753plw wrote

Just have to afford housing in Manchester…

3

RamaSchneider t1_j72mguj wrote

A public school system, in my opinion, has the following characteristics:

  1. Is open to all comers and free of charge at the door (what's needed is covered from elsewhere just as is required of public schools today);
  2. Provides an opportunity for a quality education, and
  3. Operates in a public and transparent method much as public bodies do today.

And yeah, that "elsewhere" most likely means government collected taxes.

11

MarkVII88 t1_j74v5dn wrote

In VT "elsewhere" means sending towns.

2

RamaSchneider t1_j75zoxo wrote

If you want me to fill out some details, I will. But for now I'll just say that for the most party, Vermont's education taxes are a statewide tax. You are correct regarding the sending towns to a small degree, but it is only a small part of who is paying the bills.

The easiest way to understand our state's ed taxing system is: it's a statewide tax with some local adjustments.

2

Virtual_Bug_3733 t1_j74v8ae wrote

If you want to see extreme inequity in education look no further than Bennington County. The societal and socioeconomic differences in school choice/non-operating towns vs. towns designated to public school districts is remarkable.

On one end of the spectrum you have places like Bennington and Pownal and to a lesser degree Arlington (stuck with high poverty and a couple substandard public school options), while monied places like Manchester, Dorset, North Bennington, and Winhall get vast choices of private, independent, religious, and public schools. Raise a kid in Winhall and you can use around $17k every year to send them to any school anywhere K-12. Raise a kid in downtown Bennington and you’re stuck with the second and third worst rated elementary schools in the state.

Forget redlining. A system like this works way better to segregate along socioeconomic lines.

7

clickmahheels t1_j74qtv0 wrote

Public schools have specifically failed at allowing every child to advance at their own level with no restrictions. It caters to the kids in the middle, with enormous amounts of resources thrown at kids on the bottom. The struggle to work with groups of kids with such varying needs is a specific complaint of teachers.

We pretend that public schools have standards they are required to meet, but with 1/5 of Americans being functionally illiterate, I think we need to accept that no real standards exist or are adhered to.

4

ragajoel t1_j759gw2 wrote

Another issue with public money for private schools is that many of these private schools are not under any obligation to teach children with special learning needs under the Americans with Disabilities Act, unlike their public counterparts. This goes beyond children actually diagnosed with autism or ADD and can include students who have been dubbed behavioral issues in the classroom as well. The result being that students that require the extra resources to teach are only being served by public schools. That means less resources at public schools for mainstream students as well.

4

SVTer t1_j752sgm wrote

I had plans to eventually move to a “non-operating” gold town with school choice so I could send my kids to a private/independent school. The COVID boom fucked everything up and I can’t compete with out of state money, remote workers, and air bnb. It’s super frustrating that because of where I live I’m stuck with one public school option, while families one town away can send their kids to any public, private, or independent school of their choice.

3

Galadrond t1_j79cpcp wrote

The privatization of education is an existential threat to the United States as a whole.

3

Sea_Drama_5958 t1_j74umdu wrote

If public schools weren’t horrible there wouldn’t be a need for a voucher system… capitalism in action :)

1

hotpieismyking t1_j74m9m4 wrote

I went to an independent academy in Vermont, under the voucher system, and purposely bought a house in the same district so my kids can go to the same school.

Compare that academy to the largest/closest public schools, it's night and day better

0

HeadPen5724 t1_j737q2d wrote

Would you support vouchers at public schools? I.e. every child gets a voucher to be used at the public school of their choice. Lots of districts already provide choice, doesn’t that disadvantage those who do not?

−3

FyuckerFjord t1_j75p9kg wrote

Did the public schools that made America "great" come before or after women and POC were allowed to attend? Just trying to pinpoint this "greatness."

−3

HappilyhiketheHump t1_j732xfg wrote

Well, the best public schools in Vermont have a <45% proficiency rate and a >90% graduation rate at the third greatest cost per student in the nation.

There clearly is some room for improvement here.

Why would anyone blame a parent that wants a voucher (currently available in sending towns and reciprocal districts) for an alternative to a public school that isn’t a fit for their child?

−4

SomeConstructionGuy t1_j73ci6l wrote

It’s not reasonable to blame each individual parent for wanting what’s best for their child. It is reasonable to expect parents who choose to skip the publicly funded option to pay for the private school themselves.

Public education only works if we all have a vested interest in its continued success. Vouchers help undermine the idea that we all in it together and therefor undermine the public education system for the benefit of a few.

If you want your kids to not go to public school that’s great. Pony up the cash.

11

HappilyhiketheHump t1_j73l753 wrote

And in towns that don’t provide schools? What do you suggest those parents do?

Vouchers have been used in Vermont for decades with no damage to the public schools or the children who use them.

Stop believing the NEA hype that the voucher system is gonna suddenly destroy our public school system.

0

SomeConstructionGuy t1_j73pse7 wrote

I grew up in one of those towns. They should continue to offer vouchers to surrounding PUBLIC schools. Same as they always have.

I don’t think it’ll instantly destroy education. In fact I think it’s worse because it’ll slowly drive rich high achieving kids out of public schools. Those schools will then stop offering higher lever curriculums which hurts average kids who aren’t rich.

Notice I said rich high achieving? A voucher only covers part of private tuition so parents still need to make up the rest. You have to be at least extremely comfortable to pony up the extra 10k per kid to send them to a private school.

6

HappilyhiketheHump t1_j73y0rz wrote

Many private schools in Vermont cost less per year than the average amount spent on a per student basis in Vermont. Some cost more.

I think we can agree that those who send their kid overseas on a voucher should be curtailed.

Most who send their kid to a school (private or public) on a voucher are not rich. They may be privileged as they live in Vermont, but most aren’t rich.

3

SomeConstructionGuy t1_j73yq52 wrote

Mind if i ask what school? Mine (a small charter school) was in the same boat until enrollment dropped and they had to go full public. I was firmly pro school choice based on my experience and I still am for schools that have no high school.

However I now think the potential negative consequences of sending public money to private institutions far outweigh the potential benefits. It should be limited to schools that have open enrollment.

2

Successful_Order_638 t1_j74nba9 wrote

"Why would anyone blame a parent that wants a voucher (currently available in sending towns and reciprocal districts) for an alternative to a public school that isn’t a fit for their child?"

Because I don't want to pay for some stranger's kid to attend a religious school any more than religious people want to see their tax money going to support things they morally oppose.

5

chickens6 t1_j742ri3 wrote

Mainly because tuition is only available in certain towns. If you want to give every Vermont school kid $17K off their Swiss boarding school, that's great. But right now certain towns get vouchers and school choice, other only have public school as an option.

3