From: nancy@genie.slhs.udel.edu (Nancy Lebovitz)
Subject: Re: Questions about the TEN POINT PARTY PROGRAM.
Organization: UDel, School of Life & Health Sciences
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 18:50:55 GMT

[stuff has been deleted for brevity, but I think I've left the arguments
intact]

In article <60739@mimsy.umd.edu> leonard@mimsy.umd.edu (Leonard Dickens) writes:
>Charles Isbell:
>>[me:]
>>|Top ranked private schools are kind of like top ranked restaurants...
>>| [analogy]
>>| ... chain and franchise restaurants do branch out
>>|regularly as they succeed.  These may not have quite the quality, nor
>>|near the atmosphere or snob appeal of a five-star exclusive, but they
>>|feed a hell of a lot more people.
>>
>>I'm tempted to make a joke about McDonald's as school system, but I
>>won't. 

McDonald's food is underwhelming, but it's interesting that people generally
won't eat institutional food unless they're stuck with it.

>Micky Dee's has a level of customer satisfaction that most businesses
>envy.
>
>>|Charles Isbell writes:
>>|>I really don't see any reason for this to happen one way or the other.
>>|>Unless you address the problem of where the kids who want to leave
>>|>some school and go to a "better" one go while they're waiting, it seems
>>|>to me that they'll just stay where they are and nothing will happen.
>>
>>|Obviously they will stay where they are, and for that year, they will
>>|be frustrated.  Meanwhile, though, things may be happening!  For
>>|instance, their parents may be down at the PTA railing about how
>>|Exclusivity High teaches calculus and has a dress code, and gets
>>|regular 1600 SATs... this may help to change the local system so that
>>|eventually, the local students don't want to leave any more.

Or, the fact that the better schools have waiting lists might be a hint
that there's money to be made by starting or expanding good schools. 
This would take time, but it's better than the present ongoing deterioration.

>>Perhaps the McDonald's analogy has merit:  with the taste of our
>>citizens, I'm not so sure that giving them "choice" (which I think
>>they already have for many of the important things in schools) will
>>improve our system (that is the goal?).

I don't think you're likely to do a good job when you try to help people
you despise. 

>The old state-knows-best argument.  I admit it is compelling to many
>people, especially those in government positions who want to feel
>useful.  But I think that people -- even uneducated people, even the
>underclass (nice euphemism) -- can make just as good a decision for
>themselves as the government can.  And I reject your parenthetical
>assertion that people have true choice now in their schools.  I had
>exactly one "choice" for my elementary school, my junior high school,
>and my high school.  (There was one private high school around, but my
>family could not afford it.)  How about you?
>
>
>>|>If a good school is to "expand" it must find some faculty which are
>>|>going to have to come from somewhere.
>>
>>|Sure, they are out there.  I fancy myself a good teacher, and I even
>>|like teenagers.  But I can earn $30K starting easily in the private
>>|sector.  I am not interested in being paid $15K to teach 7 classes per
>>|day of 30 uninterested students each.  That is a hell of a lot of
>>|work; if anyone doubts it, they should try it.
>>
>>Will the vouchers suddenly make them "interested students"? 
>
>They won't.  But interested students could choose to go schools that
>cater to them, thereby concentrating themselves.  Teachers might try
>to interest uninterested students in unorthodox ways that would not
>currently be allowed.
>
>>If not, how will we attract new teachers?
>
>Pay.  As I said, I suspect there are lots of people that would be
>interested in teaching if the pay were more commensurate to what they
>can get elsewhere.

Also, more people would be willing to be teachers if teachers had more
professional control. When I was a kid, I considered being a teacher,
but I dropped the idea as soon as I found out that teachers couldn't
choose their students' textbooks. 
>
>>|I think that teacher salaries in general would rise.
>>Where will the money come from?  Will you have to charge students more
>>money?  

Pay administrators less.  Also, you could lower taxes if the voucher is
for less than the public school is spending per student. (I have the
impression that this is generally the case.)

>Taxes, I suppose.  (Let us be realistic.  Income taxes are not
>vanishing in the forseeable future, especially with the huge deficit
>the bastards have run up on us.)  I have seen estimates on this group
>that public schools currently cost 6-9K/pupil/year, and private ones
>are less.  Anyone have a pointer on real data on this?  
>
>>Does the voucher, then, help the folx who seem to suffer most
>>from our current system?

I would expect it to help them, but vouchers should at least help
the people who suffer second and third most--people who are poor
but not totally dysfunctional.
>
>>Is our problem more systemic than the really bad schools with gunfire?
>>Who is the real target of the vouchers?  

I don't know that they really have a target. (I get a kick out of the
idea of the public school system being destroyed, but I don't know of
anyone else who does. I grin every time I hear some P.S. teacher or
administrator complain about vouchers--I think that school as it's
usually done mostly teaches passivity, and taking down the public
schools would be a good start.)

On the other hand, I think that most people who favor vouchers are
much less gung ho than I am, and just want parents not to be locked
into bad local schools.

>The government, and the layers of useless bureaucrats that add nothing
>to education but subtract pay.  The rigidity of the system.
>
>>Whom will it help most? least?
>
>We shall see.  Usually, it is the rich and poor, respectively.
>However, as long as it helps the poor, it deserves support.  All of
>our schools could use improvement, not just the poor ones.
>
>>|And even teachers could use hope.  What incentive do they currently
>>|have to think up innovative new ways to teach?  
>>
>>Love for the students?
>
>Hard cold cash also has its effect -- but what I was really thinking
>of as I posted that is that by changing the system so that innovative
>ideas are actually encouraged and *implemented* because they are
>innovative, you encourage people to develop them.  Why work hard on a
>new teaching method if everyone else cares naught?

Or if you aren't allowed to try it?

                                  Nancy Lebovitz
                                  nancy@genie.slhs.udel.edu
                                  calligraphic button catalogue available
                                            by email (170K)

Never let your schooling interfer with your education