Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Campaign 2010 roundup
Next Post: *** UPDATED x1 *** Giannoulias: Quite likely that family bank will not be around
Posted in:
* The Tribune editorialized today in favor of Sen. James Meeks’ school voucher bill…
Meeks’ bill would focus on 49 elementary schools and 15 high schools, the worst-performing schools in Chicago. As many as 35,000 kids would be eligible. The vast majority of those kids are poor.
They would qualify for vouchers to pay tuition at any school that admits them.
The Meeks plan wouldn’t cost the state an extra dime. It would match the money the state already provides for the children.
And it would actually leave the Chicago Public Schools with more money to spend on kids who stay.
You can read the Meeks bill by clicking here.
* The Question: Is this a good idea or not? Explain. And, please, focus on the Meeks bill at hand.
posted by Rich Miller
Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 10:55 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Campaign 2010 roundup
Next Post: *** UPDATED x1 *** Giannoulias: Quite likely that family bank will not be around
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Yes it is.
What we have been doing has failed. It is time to change. Let’s give it a try. We are broke, there are no other options. We have to give these kids a future. Let them have their freedom and stop forcing them to attend the worse schools because of where they live.
We are living in an era where we have to do things differently. Let’s do it.
Comment by VanillaMan Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 10:58 am
I find it interesting that Proft and Meeks agree on such a controversial topic.
Comment by Anon Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 11:02 am
I think it’s a great idea and should be implemented state wide as long as the private schools are exceeding state standards as well. However, this was tried in Utah a few years ago and the teacher’s unions were strongly against it, don’t expect anything less here. Teachers will say:
*This will put fewer students in their school, so instead of keeping small class sizes, the sizes will stay the same but with fewer classes (meaning fewer teachers)
*They will somehow figure that this will effect funding and provide less to schools
*They will throw private/parochial schools under the bus accusing them of not having to hold the same standards for testing and educators.
It’s a great plan, I’d support it and actively work for it as I did in Utah. However, if you get the teachers unions against it, it may be impossible. Think of every teacher, there families, and neighbors - pretty big voting bloc, pretty influential group of people even if they’d be wrong.
Comment by JI Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 11:03 am
Worth noting that Sen. Meeks’ church runs its own school in Chicago, which would likely see some benefit from his bill if it were to become law.
Comment by Ron Burgundy Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 11:03 am
It’s a great idea! And it will never pass.
Comment by Bobby Hill Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 11:04 am
Bad idea. The government will force mandates on private schools that take vouchers, destroying private education. Look what the government has done to the insurance market. Separating school from state is a much better idea.
Comment by Steve Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 11:06 am
The Meeks plan wouldn’t cost the state an extra dime. It would match the money the state already provides for the children.
And it would actually leave the Chicago Public Schools with more money to spend on kids who stay.
How does 2+2=5?
If the kids take the state money with them, doesn’t CPS still end up with the same amount per pupil — just now with fewer pupils and thus less overall money?
Comment by Rob N Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 11:07 am
Rob, the local money would still be there.
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 11:08 am
===Worth noting that Sen. Meeks’ church runs its own school in Chicago===
No, it’s not worth noting because Meeks has said that he won’t accept voucher students to avoid any conflict of interest.
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 11:09 am
Steve writes, “The government will force mandates on private schools that take vouchers, destroying private education.”
Schools of all stripes (private, parochial, public, homeschooling, etc) already have mandates in the form of curricular standards.
Comment by Rob N Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 11:10 am
Good point, Rich, but misses the other sides of those coins…
So when a student uses a voucher to attend a private school who makes up the difference between state funding per pupil (ie, “voucher”) and the private school tuition (the private school equivalent of local funding)?
And what happens when the state listens to the Trib’s editorial from the other day and decimates per pupil funding?
(Rhetorical questions…)
Comment by Rob N Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 11:14 am
===who makes up the difference ===
Parents.
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 11:21 am
If the parochials take state money they should included in all the state mandates. State holidays, state certified teachers and administrators,state labor laws, mandated gym, no praying, etc., etc., etc.
Comment by Bill Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 11:28 am
It worth trying, thats for sure.
Comment by OneMan Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 11:32 am
i have two words for Rev. Senator James Meeks:
Marva Collins
she established a blueprint by which anyone can follow to address the issue of how chicago dem controlled public schools systematically failed scores of black (and now latino) children, and still does. one WOMAN can and did make a difference her work should therefore serve as an inspirtation to others including men, e.g., rev. senator james meeks on they too can simply do what she did how they, e.g., men like rev. senator james meeks, can stop with the foolishness and histrionics.
the overly simplistic thinking on the part of meeks and others that by simply removing a child from one school and placing him in another deemed “better” will automactially yield better learning outcomes for the student is ridiculous.
and what of these 35,000 children’s parents? what will they contribute to their children’s learning? what will be required of them?
I’m not trying to be mean here, but why do poor children have children? poor people can’t even take care of themselves and their own basic needs, as is, so why bring children into the mix? and only exacerbate/perpetuate the poverty?
Comment by Will County Woman Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 11:34 am
Its a move in the right direction to break the perpetual cycle of systemic failure that is CPS. If this program prepares just one student, hopefully it will prepare a lot more than one, for college, it can be trumpeted a success.
Based on a recent report by the Civic Committee, “In many high schools, not one 11th grader is on track to succeed in a college-level math or science course.” This is unacceptable. I applaud Sen. Meeks for his continual efforts to bring about change to a broken system.
Comment by Just do something Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 11:40 am
this is a terrible idea. Private schools undermine the education process. Private schools foster elitism by segregating their children from the common. Then because they pay tuition they don’t vote for school referendums. We need to think of the doing the greatest good for all of our chidlren and not pander to the misinformed that think private schools equate to better education.
Comment by Bman Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 11:47 am
So many points to make about why this is a bad idea. Here are the first ones.
Topic A: This is a give-away to parents who are already going to private school.
Point: Maximum voucher under Meeks’ plan (assuming no foundation level cut next year) = $6,110. Tuition at Catholic High Schools = $12,500. Can families that need it the most even take advantage? No. But it is a great subsidy for those already sending their kids to those schools.
And it isn’t limited to poor families. You could be a family of 4 making $88k and still qualify, and a family of 4 making $66k and you get the MAX voucher.
Comment by George Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 12:16 pm
The biggest problem with Meeks’ bill is that it only focuses on Chicago. There are thousands of students trapped in failing schools throughout the state that don’t have the options Chicago students already has.
Comment by Downstate Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 12:20 pm
I think it’s not an awful idea. If it separates out the students who want to do well from the students who don’t care, that strikes me as a good thing. One of the worst problems with CPS is that disruptive students frequently upset the classroom and teachers wind up having to spend a lot of time on classroom management that could have been spent on instruction. Additionally teachers are often stretched too thin trying to differentiate instruction over too wide of a spectrum of skill levels.
Of course, if CPS had the legal right to remove disruptive students from the classroom and to properly track by ability level, the same thing would be achieved.
Comment by cermak_rd Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 12:21 pm
===This is a give-away to parents who are already going to private school.===
The idea is to only give the vouchers to parents whose children are enrolled in a limited number of public schools.
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 12:26 pm
I spent a little time as a substitute teacher in a north side Chicago public high school school a few years ago. Management put me in a room with 15 students who had a melange of issues from pregnancy, to disciplinary issues to apparent cognitive impairments. It was a holding pen. Perhaps vouchers are worth a try. If nothing else, getting the kids away from battle hardened teachers may be beneficial. But these kids are carrying serious problems which will follow them to any alternative school. The only solution I see is a 24/7 school for some of these kids. A Boys or Girls Town type of thing. Mayor Daley mentioned such a solution once during an interview years ago. I think he mentioned orphanages. Maybe Rich remembers the episode and the howls that resulted. Never heard it again. Folks, the majority of “seniors” in that class, those who seemed to be mentally fit, could not add or subtract fractions. And this was the north side.
Comment by Cook County Commoner Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 12:33 pm
It’s not like any of these failing schools are in, say, Hinsdale…
Comment by John Bambenek Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 12:35 pm
**I’m not trying to be mean here, but why do poor children have children? poor people can’t even take care of themselves and their own basic needs, as is, so why bring children into the mix? and only exacerbate/perpetuate the poverty**
I’m not trying to be mean here, but why do rich people have children? rich people have a sense of entitlement and a desire to separate themselves from anyone that does not have money, as is, so why bring children into the mix that will only be brought up to do the same? and only exacerbate/perpetuate an uncaring society?
Comment by Montrose Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 12:41 pm
This is well intended, but what’s going to happen when you take a kid from a poorly performing school with bad teachers and then drop him/her into a highly performing classroom? More than likely that kid is going to have trouble. There needs to be some consideration for how to get kids in underperforming schools up to speed before demoralizing them by putting them in a position to fail.
Comment by L.S. Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 12:43 pm
The CPS schools do get a bum rap. Here’s an interesting fact: At 8th grade, CPS white, Hispanic, black and low income students all score better on the state tests than students from the state as a whole (even though they start out behind in 3d grade).
Here’s some of the data:
http://lilt.ilstu.edu/jpda/charts/chart%20figures%20excel/a%20C5%20F11%20chicago%20illinois%20comparison.xlsx
Nevertheless, the Catholic schools are much better, especially for low income kids. A kid switching to a Catholic school will dramatically increase his chance of going to college.
Unfortunately, the voucher money would go to students who had already attended a failing school. It’s a shame because vouchers would work better if they were offered to students starting out in the private school. One thing that sets students back –and a downside of NCLB –is changing schools. Parents are more likely to get involved in the kids education at an early age.
Illinois currently has an nonrefundable education tax credit, which, unfortunately, does not help the lowest income parents –and might even hurt them to the extent that it gives an incentive for private schools to charge higher tuition.
Comment by gary klass Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 1:02 pm
It’s a great start. I spoke to Meeks about this a the IPI forum, and I’m convinced he’s sincere about this.
The only changes I recommended, in addition to making it universal throughout the state, was to handle the credit through the tax system (inlcuding a “negative” income tax for those paying little, with apologies to Milton Friedman) to avoid building another patronage driven “voucher” bureaucracy.
Those of us who value education and have worked in the BigEd bureaucracy know that reform, cost control, and quality improvement is virtually impossible in the current patronage and politically controlled system. Big public ed can’t be held accoutnable or salvaged.
The only hope is for funding to stick with the student and provide parents with the freedom and liberty to make the best choices for the kids’ education, be it in public or private schools.
Meeks’ bill is a good start in that direction.
Comment by PalosParkBob Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 1:05 pm
Topic B: The following statement is absolutely, 100% FALSE:
“The Meeks plan wouldn’t cost the state an extra dime. It would match the money the state already provides for the children.”
The Tribune is really stupid if they think the Foundation Level is just a check cut in that amount per student and sent to the school districts. That’s not how it works, and they need to learn about the school funding “formula” - emphasis on ‘formula’.
The foundation level of $6,119 is just one part of the formula that determines how much CPS actually receives from the State.
In REALITY, CPS receives $3,303 per student from the State of Illinois - a combination of the Foundation Level Formula and the Poverty Grant formula.
So, under Meeks’ plan, paying for a $6,119 voucher for each student to go to a Private School would actually cost the State of Illinois almost $3,000 per student additional.
CPS only gets $1,650 per student out of the Foundation Level Formula itself.
(pardon for the delay, I had to dig up the numbers)
Comment by George Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 1:06 pm
So, if the Tribune’s estimate of 35,000 kids being eligible for this voucher program is correct, that means Meeks’ bill would likely cost the State of Illinois an additional $100 million a year.
Comment by George Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 1:09 pm
gary klass,CPS doesn’t do better at the 8th grade level according to school report cards and the ISAT test.
Check it out at www.isbe.net/reportcard/publicsite/getreprit.aspx?year=2009&code=150162990_e.pdf
Don’t just check out the “percent not failing”.
Check the four levels of achievement at the end.
Chicago trails in virtually every subject, but perhaps not by as much as people may expect.
FWIW, if not for CPS and its dropout problem, the REST of Illinois would be a national leader in graduation rates.
Comment by PalosParkBob Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 1:15 pm
Trib’s claims on the money are just plain wrong. The bill does not address the funding issue at all. Further as others have rightly pointed out - the amount that students would be eligible for in voucher form (up to and over $6k per year) would be more than the state provides to CPS for each student’s public education… So there is no way it could possibly be cost neutral, even if the bill did address how the funding would work - which it does not.
Comment by downstate dem Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 1:20 pm
Vouchers are a fantasy amounting to rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. If you want a real solution, re-district CPS and the suburbs into pie shaped wedges that incorporate the city and the ‘burbs into combined districts. Blending the socio-economic groups will do more to improve and equalize the schools than any vouchers. Breaking up CPS into smaller districts combined w/ burbs would also do more. The notion of “local control of schools” is as outdated as the agriculturally based school calendar.
Comment by D.P. Gumby Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 1:31 pm
There are many issues involved in the successful education of a child. If the child feels cherished and loved the child will grow with confidence - in almost any setting. Marva Collins school was a good example of how an individual and a school can do that from outside the family. Family involvement, however, is so key to this as to overshadow nearly everything else. It is fighting a losing battle when the family is disfunctional, disinterested and disappeared. A powerful individual such as Ms Collins can make headway in that environment but the world is not filled with the likes of Marva Collins. We can’t expect to find them easily. We need journeymen teachers who are competent and we need to expect parents to be dedicated and involved. In the areas where Meeks wishes to have impact on, both are not in abundant supply. I would like to see his program more widespread but appreciate the thought that Meeks put into this proposal. Start here and see what happens. I am for it.
Comment by dupage dan Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 1:33 pm
DP Gumby,
=If you want a real solution, re-district CPS and the suburbs into pie shaped wedges that incorporate the city and the ‘burbs into combined districts.=
Didn’t we try busing already?
The location of a school is not the problem. How is combining districts different from vouchers? How is that not re-arranging the chairs on the Titanic?
Comment by dupage dan Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 1:36 pm
Simple solutions are against my religion, but the one exception I make is for school vouchers. We have had voucher programs in this country for over half a century, and they undeniably work. They’re called things like “GI Bill” and “Guaranteed Student Loans” instead of vouchers, but they are all ways of giving students money that can be used for the educational institution of their choice, just like vouchers. Our high schools may be awful, but our college and university system is world class, and its size and availability to virtually everyone in this country is due to these voucher programs. Vouchers for everyone! Amen.
Comment by Pat Robertson Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 1:43 pm
@ Steve. The Catholic Schools are supporting it.
Comment by My Opinion Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 1:43 pm
The Meeks plan should be put into place for no other reason than it might help a whole bunch of kids.
The reality is that we don’t know for sure if it will work or if it won’t. I’m sure the law of unintended consequences will rear its ugly head somewhere. But what is the alternative? Keeping the status quo?
Comment by Prognosis Negative Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 1:50 pm
If the budget for it can be worked out as advertised, I’m all for it. Similar programs have shown to be popular and successful in cities like Milwaukee, Cleveland, and D.C.
Comment by Anon Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 1:52 pm
It’s about offering these parents the opportunity of choice. Real choice.
Right now their only options are bad and worse.
Comment by keepitsimple Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 2:00 pm
I support the bill.
This gives low income students access to otheropportunities, and provides a method by which private schools can extend/open their doors to more kids. many private schools operate on tight budgets and lower salaries then the public schools; but yet the schoold ability to control their envronment is much greater, and tends to create a better learing and teaching environment in my oppinion.
That said, I would like to see vouchers for everyone and more charter schools. So far the market has produced better schools then the government has.
Comment by Ghost Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 2:00 pm
I don’t understand how schools can plan with this program.
So a certain number of kids get vouchers, lets just choose 50 to illustrate my point. So now there is a school that unknown to them will not have these 50 students showing up. But they have kind of planned on them. So at the 11th hour when they find out they are not getting the kids classes are re-shuffled and maybe a couple of teachers get laid off.
Over on the other side of town is the participating school that these kids registered to attend. They figure they are getting these 50 kids so maybe they hire a couple of teachers.
But according to the bill the kids are not held to going to the school where they registered, so they pick a different school and now that school has 50 kids show up that they didn’t plan on.
Multiply this issue times the number of groups of 50 kids in the program and you have an absolute mess. Or am I missing something.
I was on an elementary school board with five buildings for 16 years and I know how important it is to have a fairly close idea on how many students you will have show up on the first day of school and in what grades. It didn’t used to be as bad as it is now because teachers weren’t certified in specific grades and subjects. You had more leeway on how you used the staff. You don’t now.
And don’t get me started on NCLB. Any program that has a goal of having every one above average by a certain date is moronic. As the students improve the average is a moving target. You cannot, it is impossible, have a group where everyone is above the average of the group.
Comment by Irish Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 2:07 pm
Maybe meeks could adress the fact that the Chicago public Schools attend class 45 mins less per day then the national Avg. and 10 days less a year than the National avg. From K-12 a student in the Chicago Public Schools get over one year less in class time than the national avg. I dont know but this could be part of the problem.
Comment by fed up Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 2:10 pm
Fed up - Sen. Meeks is also dealing with that issue, which is clearly shown in his spat with CTU. In future reference, stick to the question so I can avoid reading your throw-up on this blog.
Comment by Just do something Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 2:17 pm
For the same cost of the Meeks plan, you could cut class sizes in these schools by half, bring in reading coaches, tutors, additional aides, provide sufficient non-school hour programming, etc.
If you all want to spend $3,000 extra per student… lets try using it to try and fix their schools first so they don’t have to go.
Comment by George Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 2:17 pm
Wouldnt the Meeks plan cost the chicago Public schools students. Students equal money and patronage jobs in Chicago so this plan has no chance. To bad something like this might actually help some kids. Im not sure there are enough private schools close enough to the city to handle a large amount of kids.
Comment by fed up Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 2:19 pm
Sounds like a sterling idea! Let’s try it in all communities so children in poorer neighborhoods can crawl out of the poverty hole they get stuck in.
Comment by Justice Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 2:19 pm
Every public school reform proposal that I’ve seen in the past 20 years makes the same mistake. You cannot “fix” a complex system by just dealing with one facet of the problem.
Simply moving [some] kids out of a low performing school will not help the school they leave and it will probably negatively impact the new school that they attend.
It’s like cracking down on crime in just one neighborhood — you don’t “solve” the crime problem you just transfer the problem to someone else.
Comment by bcross Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 2:20 pm
==== If you all want to spend $3,000 extra per student… lets try using it to try and fix their schools first so they don’t have to go. ====
yes but you would not change the school environment. Put a child in a private school, and you have to agree to that schools ability to enfroce its code of conduct, discipline etc. Public schools have been hammered and intimitaded to the point that teachers long ago lost control of the class rooms. Put in 50 readin coaches per child, but if o one is comfortable in their ability to control the child or classroom environment, then it does not matter how may employees you have.
Comment by Ghost Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 2:22 pm
Just do something. whinning will get you no where. Its a pro choice blog your choice what you read. Meeks has been in office for sometime now and accomplished nothing. This idea no matter how worthy is just one more non accomplishment for him.
Comment by fed up Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 2:22 pm
This would presume the state can get the rest of its financial house in order. Already the state has withheld millions of dollars to various private and publice entities providing services, including schools and universities. These organizations have either laid people off or are threatening layoffs based on the lack of funding. Eventually, the past due amounts will be caught up, but how would a smaller private school cope with waiting for the state to honor the vouchers? In concept it is a good idea, but execution is problematic under difficult economic conditions.
Comment by DeKalb Dragon Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 2:27 pm
==Meeks has been in office for sometime now and accomplished nothing==
Trying to understand how that differentiates him from most of his colleagues . . . .
Comment by bcross Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 2:28 pm
Ghost -
Please tell me - what is a Private School teacher going to do to better enforce its code of conduct and discipline?
Your blanket statements are ridiculous, and near offensive.
Comment by George Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 2:29 pm
And to say that adding aides into a classroom, or cutting class sizes in half wouldn’t change the school environment is either ignorance, denial, or something far worse.
Comment by George Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 2:30 pm
Bcross,
==Meeks has been in office for sometime now and accomplished nothing==
Trying to understand how that differentiates him from most of his colleagues . . . .
It makes him part of the problem I agree. I give him credit for talking about education but he had a chance to affect change in 2006 but he was bought off by Blagos lies.
Comment by fed up Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 2:31 pm
If you move 35,000 kids out of the public school system at a voucher cost of $3,200 you save about $8,000 per student since the cost of public school education is $11,500. So that frees up more than $8,000 per student. With 35,000 students in the voucher program that has a potential savings of $280 Million. Its a huge relief to the CPS system.
But CTU oppose the idea of expanding more private schools and closing public schools because it reduces union jobs. Unfortunately, the 35,000 kids who would actually have a chance at a real education is no where to be found in Union’s calculation and campaign of misinformation.
Comment by budget boy Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 2:40 pm
==Please tell me - what is a Private School teacher going to do to better enforce its code of conduct and discipline?==
You’re joking, right? Pick a public school on the South Side, say Julian, and a private school, say Mt. Carmel or Hales. Spend a day at each, and then come back and honestly try and say there isn’t a difference in school discipline. Private schools by and large have a stricter code of conduct, which creates a better atmosphere for learning.
Comment by Anon Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 2:42 pm
–If you want a real solution, re-district CPS and the suburbs into pie shaped wedges that incorporate the city and the ‘burbs into combined districts.–
I think we have enough on our plate without going there. Not going to happen.
To the issue, I’m in favor of vouchers to a certain point. I don’t want to be funding Joe Bob’s Real Good School. I think the academic, physical education and school nutrition standards should be very high. If they want the money, there are conditions.
Comment by wordslinger Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 2:52 pm
If you take 35,000 kids out of the Chicago Public schools, where are you planning on putting them their is nowhere near that many private schools within 20 miles of the city. It would have to be done on a much smaller scale. If succesful I could see more private schools opening but right now their isnt room for that many kids.
Comment by fed up Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 2:55 pm
“say there isn’t a difference in school discipline”
Ghost said that a private school teacher would be better at disciplining the same group of students.
Answer that question - not one you made up.
I hope you understand that students at private schools are self-selecting. It generally means a more-engaged parent (because they are paying tuition… duh).
Any teacher will tell you having an engaged parent makes it easier to get their students to behave.
Comment by George Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 2:56 pm
==Private schools by and large have a stricter code of conduct, which creates a better atmosphere for learning==
I would argue that private schools have better tools to use to enforce their code of conduct also. They can “throw the bums out”. Even in the “good” public schools you will find students who do nothing but disrupt the learning environment for everyone else.
I can only see two reasons for people to be so enamored with this solution that clearly only benefits selected individuals — either they care only about those individuals or they are willing?/resigned? to writing off the remaining kids.
Comment by bcross Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 2:56 pm
And if you don’t behave… they just get rid of you.
Private schools aren’t magic. It just is not the common denominator of students.
Comment by George Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 2:57 pm
one real tragedy here is that Marva Collins’ daughter until recently operated a school on the south side, in the mode of her mother. the school closed due to lack of funding. now, i cannpt speak to whether or not the daughter was able to replicate the mother’s graduation and college-bound success rate 100 percent. but, where was meeks when the schools was shut due to lack of funds. he said nothing about it and did nothing about it.
Comment by Will County Woman Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 3:21 pm
by funding i mean private, as it was a private school. if meeks had never heard of marva collins or her daughter, then shame on him. he has no business advocating for education then.
Comment by Will County Woman Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 3:22 pm
Rich
===The idea is to only give the vouchers to parents whose children are enrolled in a limited number of public schools.===
Am I missing something in the bill? I don’t see where it specifies that eligible students must be currently enrolled in a public school. What I read is that an “eligible pupil” is a child enrolled in K thru 12 and a resident of Illinois. Doesn’t that mean that children currently enrolled in private schools K thru 12 are eligible for at least the flat grant as long as they enroll in a “participating school”?
Comment by Downstate J Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 3:27 pm
The vast majority of catholic and other private schools are operating at below-capacity levels (i.e., 20 students per teacher). If that can’t take all 35,000 students, the program can be scaled down until there is time to open more schools with a replicated model.
Comment by budget boy Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 3:28 pm
Does anyone question whether the student and parent who now have the option to choose a better school will be worse off by having an voucher in hand?
Most of the crticism seems focused on how the public school they leave will be worse off. Really??? That school will be worse off?? Are we talking about the same high school in which only 5 out of 100 grads (3 out of 100 if you are Latino or African American male) will graduate from college by the age of 25 (Chicago Trib study from April 21, 2006).
Yeah, right… those are the schools we need to save. No matter what we do, we can’t let those schools close.
Comment by budget boy Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 3:37 pm
Can you imagine if firemen fought fires in a similar manner we handle school issues?
We’d all be dead!
These schools have been failing for two generations. Wrecking thousands of lives. What do you think happens when these kids grow up after attending these government funded hell holes?
Ask me. I was one of them.
I was fortunate enough to not stop learning. I had to do it on my own time. I never even got homework throughout my high school years. That school wasn’t for learning, it was for warehousing and day care. Geez people, I witnessed two of my teachers physically attacked - one was stabbed in his arm and left bleeding when he intervened in a gang fight.
I would have prayed for vouchers to get me out of there! I wanted to learn! I wanted to go to college as far from that neighborhood as possible, so I had to attend night school and summer school so that I could skip a year and bail on that dead end dump!
It is worse now.
AND you guys still want to TALK? It must be nice to sit and have these little egotistical intellectual arguments over this or that solution for OTHER PEOPLE’S LIVES. You guys obviously didn’t experience what we did, or you would have stopped talking and started saving our lives!
When you are a kid sick to your stomach because you were afraid of what could happen at school, and you had to walk through metal detectors before an army of guards - you don’t really want to believe that those who could do something would rather play politics instead of help you out. Or worry about the union. Or worry about the funding.
All you know is that your life sucks because your school sucks.
Comment by VanillaMan Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 4:07 pm
===The idea is to only give the vouchers to parents whose children are enrolled in a limited number of public schools.===
I actually read the bill and I don’t see where this is a limited scope program Here’s how the bill reads:
For purposes of this Section:
“Eligible pupil means a student enrolled in kindergarten or any of grades one through 12 who is an Illinois resident.
I would agree with George that this seems like a new subsidy to families already sending their children to private schools. If so, that’s a costly proposition.
Comment by Budget Watcher Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 4:24 pm
There is capacity for 42,000 students in the Archdiocese system in the neighborhoods that Sen. Meeks is proposing the reforms, which is why the 42,000 keeps coming up in public statements.
If there are more students, more capacity could be made available.
JBP
Comment by John Powers Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 4:40 pm
I taught math and physics in private schools and substituted at over a dozen suburban high schools, as well as worked managing capital operations at CPS.
I can tell you that the biggest difference that leads to success is the culture of the school and its staff.
I saw CPS multi-cultural schools in blue collar neighborhoods that knocked the socks off overpriced “good” suburban schools.
Essentially the big discriminator is having the ability to choose staff and have a leader who is more committed to serving the children than ensuring a well connected contractor is getting hired or that a politicans’ buddy is getting a teaching job or tenure.
At the private schools, pay was FAR less but attitude for success was much higher with the staff. We weren’t there because we were unemployable in any other field as is often the case with tenured public school teachers. We were there because we were driven to have the kids of all ethnicities and economic backgrounds succeed.
If a teacher didn’t effectively meet that goal, they were gone in the private system.
In the public system they were given a fat raise, ofetn a promotion, and a lucrative early retirement.
We need to form a “public” education system fre from teh politics and union obstruction to quality if we ever want to educate the kids properly.
That’s why empowering parents to fund the schools that best serve their students needs is the ONLY way things will improve.
One other thing, With the rigid “zero tolerance” dsicipline at Public schools, it is much easier to toss out an unruly, or often basically just mischevous, student.
Where do they go after they’re kicked out of public schools? Private schools, of course!
Comment by PalosParkBob Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 4:55 pm
Budget Watcher:
I think your reading of the bill is correct. But Meeks has said publicly both at the IPI seminar and with Carol Marin on Chicago Tonight that it would be for students currently attending the 25 worst performing public schools in the city.
Let’s give those kids and their parents a chance now, right? Attending a new school could change their lives.
Comment by budget boy Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 5:17 pm
it’s a good idea. let’s try it for the kid’s sake.
Comment by jack Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 7:11 pm
Budget boy - the criticism isn’t focused on how the remaining school would be worse off, but the remaining students whose parents don’t have $6,000 lying around to send their child to a private school.
So a couple get a discount on a private school at a premium cost, and then the rest have to go to the same school that now has even LESS resources.
Seems like the majority of kids get hurt.
Comment by ok Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 7:29 pm
Enough with the strawmen…A marginal cost $6500 is enough for the Archdiocese to take another student. Sr. Mary Paul (the Superintendent) has committed to welcoming new students at that amount.
The remaining TBD numbers are on capital expense, which the Feds and the State are supposed to be providing already (but they don’t) to Private Schools.
JBP
Comment by John Powers Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 8:17 pm
What works is a disciplined environment, intelligent and diligent teachers, and an academically rigorous curriculum. All those elements define an institutional culture. No matter where the tuition is coming from, not every child and not every parent can fit into that kind of culture.
There will be winners and losers, but I agree with Meeks, we need to give these kids a chance.
The biggest argument against the vouchers is that they take money and also students away form the public school system. That’s only bad if the kids exist for the benefit of the public school system, not the other way around.
Comment by Anon III Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 10:26 pm