Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

mojitz t1_jecaife wrote

Good start, but private schools should be banned entirely. Their primary function isn't education, but to serve as a place for the children of the elite to network and calcify their already substantial advantages within society. If you desperately want to spare your kids from the "horrors" of the public education system, then you should either be working to make that system better or else home schooling.

9

Real-Pierre-Delecto2 t1_jedy7kj wrote

Dumb takes like this are exactly why we need decent independent schools. Like my Daughters 12 person high school is raking in dough and is full of the "elite". Sad generalizations that are not at all reality. Our independent schools are not Exeter Prep and the like good lord. Now let me get back my substantial advantages in the NEK. Jeesh

11

TheGoldberryBombadil t1_jeeksnz wrote

I know, comparing Vermont private schools to NH private schools is like comparing apples and oranges (and that’s an understatement).

1

ballofsnowyoperas t1_jee2g6o wrote

As a private school teacher, you could not be more wrong.

11

Rogers_Ebert t1_jee4ytq wrote

That's the benefit of their public education showing. Indoctrinated into the State.

−5

bigmountainbig t1_jectexo wrote

you're generalizing about private schools. you're describing schools like Deerfield, Andover etc. there are a ton of private schools (in VT) that are nothing like those schools.

10

mrgrey772 t1_jefm6u1 wrote

And if there were most of us would be clamoring to get our young ones In.

2

TheGoldberryBombadil t1_jecp3ev wrote

I just read the bill, it only applies to private schools that are in areas without public schools (and so the private schools are necessary for any education for local kids at all). I suspect St J is an example, or maybe Burr and Burton?

5

Thick_Piece t1_jeejrj1 wrote

A child gets twice the education at Burr and Burton then any public school in Vermont.

3

Sol_Hando t1_jegsgw9 wrote

Rather than allowing parents to provide the best food for their children, we should mandate all children eat the same state issued rations. Otherwise the children of the elite will benefit from superior nutrition leaving the rest of the population in the dust. If parents truly want the best for their children, they should work to improve the quality of all food instead.

2

Waste_Sign_4661 t1_jeez1c7 wrote

You can’t be serious. As someone who moved here less than a year ago the public schools around me are questionable at best. The worst inner city schools I went to as a child weren’t falling so nearly behind. I’m talking grade levels behind. I’m actually shocked and looking into other options for them next school year.

0

TheGoldberryBombadil t1_jeco7f8 wrote

Reading the bill, it looks like it only applies to independent schools that are eligible to receive public tuition, and that’s defined as a private school in an area that ONLY has a private school without a public school option. What’s an example of that - St. Johnsbury maybe? I can’t think of others.

8

bonanzapineapple t1_jecvmhc wrote

Lyndon, Thetford, Manchester

10

ballofsnowyoperas t1_jee2d2d wrote

Thetford is kind of a mix between public and private. The taxpayers pay for their town’s students to go there, but they also tuition in kids from other towns with school choice. I can’t see how this bill would affect them negatively.

4

PudVortex3000 t1_jed2n65 wrote

North Bennington strategically crafted its way into the choice/tuition system a few years back. Removed themselves from the public school system, shut down the elementary school and turned it independent, and gave residents the option to spend 17k on any school they want. Most of the kids are now in private/independent schools.

7

TheGoldberryBombadil t1_jee2j53 wrote

Wow, I didn’t know that. I know some schools up north started combining public elementary schools recently, but that seems like a pretty drastic shift.

3

polarbearrape t1_jeeno2q wrote

I could be wrong but I think the compass school in Westminster fits too

2

binarypie t1_jedesw0 wrote

While growing up In Franklin County some people had private choices for high school other than the shit hole that is MVU. For some this was the path to get their kids out of poverty. I hope this very specific door is not closed.

8

casewood123 OP t1_jee17ja wrote

I could’ve sent my kids to a different school, than MVU. But I would’ve had to transporttransport them myself. which wasn’t going to happen since I have to work every day. But I wish I could’ve sent my kids somewhere else.

6

Rogers_Ebert t1_jee4qsm wrote

The State is closing schools down and offering terrible educational services. Their priorities? Making sure no one else can offer better services and to regulate them out of existence.

8

RamaSchneider t1_jee288q wrote

I support a public school system that is ...

Provides a quality education, is open to all comers, legally accountable to the public, and free of charge at the door.

My preference is that this system is available to all from birth though end of life.

7

zombienutz1 t1_jec00yo wrote

This Mill Moore clown comparing public vs private to casual skier vs competitive skier is such a weak ass argument. They're just trying to pick and choose kids that will conform to their "standards" and the rest can fuck off.

4

Smeedge_Kilgannon t1_jedn04g wrote

Which accomplishes nothing excepts hurts the average Vermont child.

3

Rogers_Ebert t1_jee4upg wrote

That's the goal. They want complete control over your child's education. They're incensed people would choose private or State run.

2

Kixeliz t1_jeejip5 wrote

Hey, this is fun. I can play this game too. See, the goal of the pro-private school side is to suck as much public funding out of the public education system as possible. Then conservatives can point to a poorly run system they helped create while propping up the for-profits. (remind anyone of how conservatives govern? Ruin government then point to how ineffective government is and how private business is the solution). This is easy to see on the local level, with conservatives getting elected to the school board and immediately slashing school funding (See: Barre). That shitty school system helps keeps the populous dumb, aka easier to control, while also filling the pockets of the already wealthy using tax dollars for private schools.

Conservatives are incensed that they may have to send their kids to the same school as the poors so they want their own fancy schools while also getting the public to pay for them. And they are banking on enough of the population already being dumb enough to let them get away with it. Their kid gets nothing but the best, while the rest are left as dumb as possible so they can be whipped into a frenzy over "groomers" or "illegals" or whatever other existential "threat" of the day to keep them occupied.

Much like "the beatings will continue until morale improves," here we have "the funding will diminish until educational outcomes improve." Both make as much sense and get the expected outcome.

12

casewood123 OP t1_jefa8px wrote

The definition of “conservatism” is getting other people to pay for the shit they want.

1

Kixeliz t1_jefajc5 wrote

See, I've always taken the "conserve" part to mean they are conserving their wealth. Think Scrooge McDuck swimming in a pile of gold, or the dragon from the Hobbit.

1

Smeedge_Kilgannon t1_jef21b8 wrote

This is the single dumbest pice of hyperbolic nonsense I've read on here all week.

0

Kixeliz t1_jef2xw8 wrote

This is actually high praise coming from a Mid-Vermont Christian School apologist. Y'all hate when your shenanigans get called out, huh? How's that indoctrination going?

3

PudVortex3000 t1_jed1vbz wrote

I’m in Bennington County in a supervisory union that has designated public schools depending on what town/neighborhood you live in. Move one town over into a place like Manchester, Dorset, or Winhall, and you get the option to use your $17k education tax on any school you want.

Tell me how that’s fair to some section 8 kid forced into Bennington public schools vs one in Winhall who can choose among a half dozen local private schools, a couple public schools, and even the option of an out of state boarding school.

Sure as shit, I want to move into one of those towns as my kids enter middle/high school. But damn, if you don’t have the means to pay into the high real estate of the Manchester area, you’re stuck with the public option.

If you can’t offer this option to every Vermont student, it shouldn’t be offered to those in specific towns.

1

Rogers_Ebert t1_jee5byz wrote

Listen to yourself. You at the same tome acknowledge the superiority of the private schools but if everyone can't have it you'd rather deny it to everyone. It's so cynical and petty that you would deny children a better education because you or someone else might not be able to experience it.

Misery loves company.

−1

notfornswf t1_jee9fca wrote

No, it's called making the bad choice better. Instead of leaving the public school in a bad situation and making the private school better with public taxes.

3

Rogers_Ebert t1_jeew5mh wrote

If there is a sub standard product, you don't force everyone to use it in the hopes that it improves. The fact of the matter is that it isnt the $$$ invested. Vermont invests more per student than private schools yet still have sub-standards in the eyes of many, its the meddling of the State and it's organs that depreciate the experience.

−1

Kixeliz t1_jef37h9 wrote

> If there is a sub standard product, you don't force everyone to use it in the hopes that it improves.

No, you punish the system. That's the only way that works, carrot and stick. So you punish an underperforming school, reduce it's funding and then....somehow....the school improves? Or it goes under, that's cool, too, for the pro-private school folks, at least.

2

TheTr7nity t1_jebv8w7 wrote

Trying to pressure private schools to conform or no funds.

−12

random_vermonter t1_jecbruv wrote

Private religious schools shouldn’t get a lick of my money or anyone else. These are the same clowns that instead of trying to improve public schools, would rather they collapse.

26

somedudevt t1_jecbj8o wrote

Seems pretty fucking reasonable that we as a society have an expectation that our tax money will be spent on creating good citizens not little Adolfs

19

TheGoldberryBombadil t1_jecxfrh wrote

Except this bill is aimed at schools like Lyndon, Burr and Burton, St. Johnsbury, which are technically private but basically operate as public schools for local kids.

4

somedudevt t1_jeeq2ee wrote

But I don’t give a shit… if you get state money, you should be turning out kids who are educated in a way that fits the states norms and values. And you should be accepting all kids who want to attend. I don’t think that the semi-private schools that are the main school for their town are at any kind of risk. I haven’t read the law, but compliance with state education standards seems like a pretty base level expectation. As a kid who had school choice, chose SJA, but had an 504 plan, SJA refused to accept me unless I had a true IEP which came with more money for them. Through some testing and other crap I was given an IEP, and attended SJA for a total of 6 weeks before they decided that I wasn’t a fit, and I got sent to a different school. They take state money, fuck them treating kids who learn differently like they are fucking diseased. What those schools fail to do is support kids who have LDs, and that’s a disservice to the kids, some of whom will grow out of those issues, and support in those years is imperative in their future success. Luckily for me after 18 months of bouncing I landed in a public high-school that set me up for college, and I’m now an adult with a career. But a lot of kids who get cast aside by these schools don’t get that support, or don’t do well through the uncertainty.

3

TheGoldberryBombadil t1_jeesx40 wrote

I mean, it sounds like this bill is intended to address exactly this situation, and I am sorry that happened to you. But I don't think it's fair to call kids that attend St. Johnsbury, Lyndonville, Burr and Burton, Thetford, "little Adolfs". These are just normal Vermont kids from normal Vermont families.

1

somedudevt t1_jeeulig wrote

Oh no they aren’t… they are normal. But it also impacts schools like the one that just forfeited it’s basketball season because they hate LGBT people and those kids are on a path to being little adolfs.

1

TheGoldberryBombadil t1_jeev4dr wrote

No, that's a private religious school that does NOT receive public funding. Our tax dollars do not go to those schools. And this bill only applies to schools that receive public funding, so it has nothing to do with the private religious schools!

2

Kixeliz t1_jefgh99 wrote

> No, that's a private religious school that does NOT receive public funding.

Yet. They sure are trying like hell, though.

https://vtdigger.org/2023/02/17/in-bid-for-state-approval-religious-schools-seek-to-sidestep-anti-discrimination-laws/

> But now, a pair of religious schools are testing that rule. In applications to the State Board of Education last month, the heads of two Vermont Christian schools sought approval for tuition money — but hinted that they might not follow all of Vermont’s anti-discrimination laws.

One of those two Christian schools? The same Mid-Vermont school that forfeit over a trans opponent.

0

TheGoldberryBombadil t1_jefh9d7 wrote

Well, and there's the rub. Those schools can't (or shouldn't be able to) accept public funding without abiding by the public rules. Which makes such obvious sense. Can't have your cake and eat it too.

0

Kixeliz t1_jefi1iw wrote

You would think, but then the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that school voucher programs can't discriminate against schools because of their religious practices. So that's why these Vt. schools are trying to force their way into public dollars.

0

5XTEEM t1_jecqbfr wrote

Trying to prevent private institutions of all types from swindling our tax money ideally, right?

3