Why are school vouchers such a taboo?

[Icorpse]

I recently had an argument with a friend that claimed that I was doing a disservice by having my kid go to a charter school. He argued that vouchers take away public funding from schools and that in turn weakens the public school systems.

First, I do not support vouchers for use in private schools that charge a tuition and/or fees. However, I do not see much of a problem with them otherwise. In fact, I'd say that our state should adopt an all voucher system and give parents a real choice in terms of where they can send their kids.

Why is just about every Democratic candidate (and many Republicans) scared to take a stand and hold schools accountable? The list goes on and on...

1. Stan Norwalk
2. Josh Stein
3. Ty Harrell
4. David Price
5. Brad Miller
6. HW

Is it just a matter of following the party's ideology on the subject? Now to be fair, many of these politicians are educated, smart and progressive individuals and I support many of them. This is a year of change and let's take a stand and hold schools accountable.

[dhyatt]

I recently had an argument with a friend that claimed that I was doing a disservice by having my kid go to a charter school. He argued that vouchers take away public funding from schools and that in turn weakens the public school systems.

First, I do not support vouchers for use in private schools that charge a tuition and/or fees. However, I do not see much of a problem with them otherwise. In fact, I'd say that our state should adopt an all voucher system and give parents a real choice in terms of where they can send their kids.

Why is just about every Democratic candidate (and many Republicans) scared to take a stand and hold schools accountable? The list goes on and on...

1. Stan Norwalk
2. Josh Stein
3. Ty Harrell
4. David Price
5. Brad Miller
6. HW

Is it just a matter of following the party's ideology on the subject? Now to be fair, many of these politicians are educated, smart and progressive individuals and I support many of them. This is a year of change and let's take a stand and hold schools accountable.

It's mostly just party ideology. Teacher unions consistently fight vouchers because if there was true school choice many of their jobs would be threatened (or at least they think so). These unions are big contributors to Dem campaigns. 'nuff said.

I do have one question though: You say "I do not support vouchers for use in private schools that charge a tuition and/or fees", what would the vouchers be used for then???

Vouchers should not harm public school funding at all because they would almost certainly - if ever adopted - be for an amount less than what we are currently paying per pupil. I'm not certain of the current per pupil cost in Wake County but I'm guessing it's somewhere in the $7K range. A $5K voucher would add $2K to the public schools for every kid that left the public school system.

The fear among public school advocates is that only the very poor and difficult to educate would remain in the public school system. I've always found that argument very odd because it reinforces the notion that public schools have lots of problems and anybody who can would leave them.

[JoeCiulla]

I recently had an argument with a friend that claimed that I was doing a disservice by having my kid go to a charter school. He argued that vouchers take away public funding from schools and that in turn weakens the public school systems.

First, I do not support vouchers for use in private schools that charge a tuition and/or fees. However, I do not see much of a problem with them otherwise. In fact, I'd say that our state should adopt an all voucher system and give parents a real choice in terms of where they can send their kids.

Why is just about every Democratic candidate (and many Republicans) scared to take a stand and hold schools accountable? The list goes on and on...

1. Stan Norwalk
2. Josh Stein
3. Ty Harrell
4. David Price
5. Brad Miller
6. HW

Is it just a matter of following the party's ideology on the subject? Now to be fair, many of these politicians are educated, smart and progressive individuals and I support many of them. This is a year of change and let's take a stand and hold schools accountable.

I'm not sure why you include HW in your list since the Town Council has nothing to do with school vouchers. I think you answered your own question with the other names, it is a matter of party ideology -- and placing that ideology ahead of individual interests.

Newsflash: People are already bailing out of WCPSS. Look at what's happening at Enloe HS. For a long time, some of our best and brightest students wanted to go there. Today, they are so under-funded that they can't even provide textbooks to their students, they have to share (while plenty of money is wasted in other places). Gang violence there is increasing. How much longer will our best and brightest want to go to Enloe?

As DonH points out, the vouchers would be for LESS than WCPSS spends per pupil, so more vouchers mean higher funding for those left in the system.

Funny, but most of the politicians around here who have school-age students and are against vouchers have their own kids in private schools.

[Ankur]

Vouchers should not harm public school funding at all because they would almost certainly - if ever adopted - be for an amount less than what we are currently paying per pupil. I'm not certain of the current per pupil cost in Wake County but I'm guessing it's somewhere in the $7K range. A $5K voucher would add $2K to the public schools for every kid that left the public school system.


Not true. People who are currently affording to send there kids to private schools ( these are kids who have already left) will receive vouchers and use it without benefiting public schools.

Non-public schools are NOT REQUIRED to educate every kid that comes to there door and thus should not be subsidized.

[Ankur]

Funny, but most of the politicians around here who have school-age students and are against vouchers have their own kids in private schools.

Nothing funny about it. If you have means to afford non-public schools without relying on public assistance (vouchers), you are actually serving public school interest by sending your kid to non-public school.

[dhyatt]

Vouchers should not harm public school funding at all because they would almost certainly - if ever adopted - be for an amount less than what we are currently paying per pupil. I'm not certain of the current per pupil cost in Wake County but I'm guessing it's somewhere in the $7K range. A $5K voucher would add $2K to the public schools for every kid that left the public school system.


Not true. People who are currently affording to send there kids to private schools ( these are kids who have already left) will receive vouchers and use it without benefiting public schools.

Non-public schools are NOT REQUIRED to educate every kid that comes to there door and thus should not be subsidized.

If a voucher program was instituted immediately, I suppose that could be true depending on what percentage of students are currently in private school. If it's phased in instead then that argument is out the window.

Why should private schools not be subsidized simply because they are not required to educate every student? That logic inevitably leads us to those state colleges and universities that accept all kinds of subsidies yet don't admit every student that applies. Some of them, like UNC, are very picky with who they admit yet still receive hefty public subsidies.

[Ankur]

Vouchers should not harm public school funding at all because they would almost certainly - if ever adopted - be for an amount less than what we are currently paying per pupil. I'm not certain of the current per pupil cost in Wake County but I'm guessing it's somewhere in the $7K range. A $5K voucher would add $2K to the public schools for every kid that left the public school system.


Not true. People who are currently affording to send there kids to private schools ( these are kids who have already left) will receive vouchers and use it without benefiting public schools.

Non-public schools are NOT REQUIRED to educate every kid that comes to there door and thus should not be subsidized.

If a voucher program was instituted immediately, I suppose that could be true depending on what percentage of students are currently in private school. If it's phased in instead then that argument is out the window.

Why should private schools not be subsidized simply because they are not required to educate every student? That logic inevitably leads us to those state colleges and universities that accept all kinds of subsidies yet don't admit every student that applies. Some of them, like UNC, are very picky with who they admit yet still receive hefty public subsidies.

You are comparing apples to oranges. The right of free education applies to K-12 and not college education. Public policy can be extended to include college (at a large expense) but then everybody will be rocket scientists and who will flip burgers for you?

[Icorpse]

Vouchers should not harm public school funding at all because they would almost certainly - if ever adopted - be for an amount less than what we are currently paying per pupil. I'm not certain of the current per pupil cost in Wake County but I'm guessing it's somewhere in the $7K range. A $5K voucher would add $2K to the public schools for every kid that left the public school system.


Not true. People who are currently affording to send there kids to private schools ( these are kids who have already left) will receive vouchers and use it without benefiting public schools.

Non-public schools are NOT REQUIRED to educate every kid that comes to there door and thus should not be subsidized.

If a voucher program was instituted immediately, I suppose that could be true depending on what percentage of students are currently in private school. If it's phased in instead then that argument is out the window.

Why should private schools not be subsidized simply because they are not required to educate every student? That logic inevitably leads us to those state colleges and universities that accept all kinds of subsidies yet don't admit every student that applies. Some of them, like UNC, are very picky with who they admit yet still receive hefty public subsidies.

By private schools I mean schools that selectively allow students to attend and charge a tuition on top of what a voucher would provide for (Cary Academy, Ravenscroft etc). I do understand that many "charter" schools are owned by foundations and individuals.

Universities are not the same as K-12 schools. I agree with the poster above. It is like comparing apples to oranges.

Joe C -- Based on what I have seen, vouchers pay about the same as what the state spends on every student. Why do you say it is less? Some numbers would help.

[JoeCiulla]

Numbers I've seen are proposed vouchers at $7K/yr vs. the $9K/yr that WCPSS spends.

[MattD]

Funny, but most of the politicians around here who have school-age students and are against vouchers have their own kids in private schools.

Joe - this is a pretty bold statement. Can you back this up?

[JoeCiulla]

Funny, but most of the politicians around here who have school-age students and are against vouchers have their own kids in private schools.

Joe - this is a pretty bold statement. Can you back this up?

Yes, I can. I'm still checking out the last few. PM me if you want what I have so far or can help fill in the blanks.

[dhyatt]

Anybody know how many kids are in private vs. public schools K-12 now?

And as far as colleges / universities, my argument is purely along subsidy lines. We subsidize them already, do we not? And they don't take all applicants, do they?

I'm not in any way advocating that the full cost of attendance be covered.

If the $9K per pupil estimate is correct for the WCPSS, then a formula similar to the following could be used to estimate voucher payments that would result in a net increase in per pupil public school funding:

Let X=current # of private school students
Let Y=current # of public school students
Let Z=proposed voucher payment
Let q=change in students (# moving from public to private, * the only real unknown)
Assume $9K per pupil cost for WCPSS

((Y-q) * 9000) + (q * (9000-Z)) >= (X+q) * Z

9000Y - 9000q + 9000q - Zq >= ZX +Zq

9000Y >= ZX + 2ZQ
9000Y >= Z(X+2Q)
9000 / Z >= (X+2Q) / Y

[JoeCiulla]

There are 130,000 students in WCPSS.
There are 30,000 additional Wake County students who are in private or home school.

[dhyatt]

Anybody know how many kids are in private vs. public schools K-12 now?

And as far as colleges / universities, my argument is purely along subsidy lines. We subsidize them already, do we not? And they don't take all applicants, do they?

I'm not in any way advocating that the full cost of attendance be covered.

If the $9K per pupil estimate is correct for the WCPSS, then a formula similar to the following could be used to estimate voucher payments that would result in a net increase in per pupil public school funding:

Let X=current # of private school students
Let Y=current # of public school students
Let Z=proposed voucher payment
Let q=change in students (# moving from public to private, * the only real unknown)
Assume $9K per pupil cost for WCPSS

((Y-q) * 9000) + (q * (9000-Z)) >= (X+q) * Z

9000Y - 9000q + 9000q - Zq >= ZX +Zq

9000Y >= ZX + 2ZQ
9000Y >= Z(X+2Q)
9000 / Z >= (X+2Q) / Y

There has to be an error in my math somewhere :-/ I'll check it again when I get home.

[chaboard]

There are 130,000 students in WCPSS.
There are 30,000 additional Wake County students who are in private or home school.

So a $5000 voucher per student would result in 30,000x$5,000 = $150 MILLION in NEW annual spending right out of the box.

Don posits a savings of $4000 ($9000 current cost - $5000 voucher) for every kid who switches public to private. Well in that case you would need about 38,000 kids (29% of the total)to transfer to private schools JUST TO BREAK EVEN !!!! And that's ignoring the fact that if you take out 29% of the kids from the public system the per-student cost of teaching the remaining 71% is going to only go up.

You'd have to:
- more than double private school capacity overnight just to break even
- find 38,000 parents in Wake County (on top of the current 30k) willing to pony up cash on their own on top of the $5k voucher to send their kid to a new private school
- pretend that a sudden influx of 68,000x$5000 (well over $300 million) in public money into their coffers wouldn't drive tuition at existing private schools up dramatically
- pretend that you could educate the 71% of public students left behind - featuring a highly increased ratio of poor kids - to the same level at the same cost you can today.

And even with all that you'd be ignoring the most important argument against vouchers - tax dollars should not be spent on religous instruction of children.

Vouchers are not about education. They are about getting that first number - getting huge transfers of tax dollars straight to churches, benefiting only those already able to pay private school tuition, and trying to destroy the public school system. 95% of the rest of the arguments you hear are stalking horses. My rule of thumb - any voucher proposal that isn't 100% means tested is not a serious attempt to address education.

[dhyatt]

There are 130,000 students in WCPSS.
There are 30,000 additional Wake County students who are in private or home school.

So a $5000 voucher per student would result in 30,000x$5,000 = $150 MILLION in NEW annual spending right out of the box.

Don posits a savings of $4000 ($9000 current cost - $5000 voucher) for every kid who switches public to private. Well in that case you would need about 38,000 kids (29% of the total)to transfer to private schools JUST TO BREAK EVEN !!!! And that's ignoring the fact that if you take out 29% of the kids from the public system the per-student cost of teaching the remaining 71% is going to only go up.

You'd have to:
- more than double private school capacity overnight just to break even
- find 38,000 parents in Wake County (on top of the current 30k) willing to pony up cash on their own on top of the $5k voucher to send their kid to a new private school
- pretend that a sudden influx of 68,000x$5000 (well over $300 million) in public money into their coffers wouldn't drive tuition at existing private schools up dramatically
- pretend that you could educate the 71% of public students left behind - featuring a highly increased ratio of poor kids - to the same level at the same cost you can today.

And even with all that you'd be ignoring the most important argument against vouchers - tax dollars should not be spent on religous instruction of children.

Vouchers are not about education. They are about getting that first number - getting huge transfers of tax dollars straight to churches, benefiting only those already able to pay private school tuition, and trying to destroy the public school system. 95% of the rest of the arguments you hear are stalking horses. My rule of thumb - any voucher proposal that isn't 100% means tested is not a serious attempt to address education.

Settle down now, you've got a few issues to deal with here.

#1) The program could be started by phasing it in, starting with Kindergarten and maybe first grade. This would mitigate the need of providing vouchers for much of the existing private / home school population.

#2) The number of families needed to make it work depends on the size of the voucher. There is a reasonable number in there somewhere but it would take some research to ferret out.

#3) Increased demand should lower the cost of tuition, not raise it. (except from a liberals vantage point of course ;-) )

#4) Depending on the exact voucher amount and # of transfers, there could very well be a large increase in per pupil $$$ available. If it could result in reducing 'poor' students class size to 10-12, is that something you could seriously complain about?

#5) Very few private schools include religious education. We're not an Islamic country - yet. (sorry, couldn't help myself)

#6) So means test vouchers to start. That's fine with me and certainly would be a step in the right direction.

Does my math look right to you btw? The numbers I've run using public/private enrollment as provided by Joe don't seem to make any sense. There has to be an error but I'm having trouble spotting it.

[chaboard]

#3) Increased demand should lower the cost of tuition, not raise it. (except from a liberals vantage point of course ;-) )


Forgetting your Econ 101? Increased demand makes it a seller's market....ie, higher prices.


#5) Very few private schools include religious education. We're not an Islamic country - yet. (sorry, couldn't help myself)


Can you back that up? I'm under the impression that the vast majority are run by religious institutions (mainly Catholic and the more fundamentalist Protestant branches) and almost all of those include a fair amount of religion in the curriculum?


#6) So means test vouchers to start. That's fine with me and certainly would be a step in the right direction.


Means test the vouchers (so the poor really ARE the ones getting a choice) and require any institution taking a voucher to take it as tuition with no additional charge (so that the poor really ARE getting a choice in more than name only) and I'll swallow my religious objections and support a pilot in the name of educational reform experimentation.


Does my math look right to you btw? The numbers I've run using public/private enrollment as provided by Joe don't seem to make any sense. There has to be an error but I'm having trouble spotting it.

I'll look it over....I stopped reading when you said it was wrong. ;)

[dhyatt]

#3) Increased demand should lower the cost of tuition, not raise it. (except from a liberals vantage point of course ;-) )


Forgetting your Econ 101? Increased demand makes it a seller's market....ie, higher prices.

Rats.... thought I could slip that one by :-/



#5) Very few private schools include religious education. We're not an Islamic country - yet. (sorry, couldn't help myself)
Can you back that up? I'm under the impression that the vast majority are run by religious institutions (mainly Catholic and the more fundamentalist Protestant branches) and almost all of those include a fair amount of religion in the curriculum?
Only with the schools in the Raleigh area. Cardinal Gibbons is one of the largest 'Catholic' High Schools in the state and if they have any religious training... well let's just say it isn't working very well.



#6) So means test vouchers to start. That's fine with me and certainly would be a step in the right direction.
Means test the vouchers (so the poor really ARE the ones getting a choice) and require any institution taking a voucher to take it as tuition with no additional charge (so that the poor really ARE getting a choice in more than name only) and I'll swallow my religious objections and support a pilot in the name of educational reform experimentation.

Deal! :-)



Does my math look right to you btw? The numbers I've run using public/private enrollment as provided by Joe don't seem to make any sense. There has to be an error but I'm having trouble spotting it.I'll look it over....I stopped reading when you said it was wrong. ;)

Thanks.... I think.

[Wuptdo]

IMHO, the entire public education system is broke for a variety of reasons, but primarily federal intervention is the main problem. Factor in the basic philosophy of the demokratic party (Better life through Big Government); large teachers unions, and the fact that "Big Ed" is a multi-billion dollar business.

Simple Solution: Education dollars should FOLLOW the child, not the system.

[StanN]

Here is an excellent summary of the pro's and con's of vouchers. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_vouchers#Proponents

Don said I oppose them because..."It's mostly just party ideology. Teacher unions consistently fight vouchers because if there was true school choice many of their jobs would be threatened (or at least they think so). These unions are big contributors to Dem campaigns. 'nuff said."

But Don knows that long before I ever thought of running for office, I was against vouchers. To me, the con's overwhelm the pro's. While I can't speak for the others listed, I know several well enough to believe that it is a matter of conviction.

Those that support vouchers KNOW they are right. Hmmm...

If vouchers were a popular idea you would see NC Republicans pushing hard for them. I haven't heard peep out of the right wing of the Wake BOC or other local Republican candidates on vouchers. Even McCrory has taken only a tentative toe in the water position.

Either the local pols know vouchers are not supported by other than a small minority of Wake's citizens or they just don't believe in them.
I suggest you ask Nelson Dollar, Paul Stam, Marylin Avila, Richard Stevens and Neal Hunt and the Republicans running for the BOC where they stand on vouchers and publish that here.

And then there is the inconvenient truth...NC's constitution guarantees a free K-12 public education to every student. Oh well whats a constitution among friends?

[JoeCiulla]

Here is an excellent summary of the pro's and con's of vouchers. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_vouchers#Proponents

Don said I oppose them because..."It's mostly just party ideology. Teacher unions consistently fight vouchers because if there was true school choice many of their jobs would be threatened (or at least they think so). These unions are big contributors to Dem campaigns. 'nuff said."

But Don knows that long before I ever thought of running for office, I was against vouchers. To me, the con's overwhelm the pro's. While I can't speak for the others listed, I know several well enough to believe that it is a matter of conviction.

Those that support vouchers KNOW they are right. Hmmm...

If vouchers were a popular idea you would see NC Republicans pushing hard for them. I haven't heard peep out of the right wing of the Wake BOC or other local Republican candidates on vouchers. Even McCrory has taken only a tentative toe in the water position.

Either the local pols know vouchers are not supported by other than a small minority of Wake's citizens or they just don't believe in them.
I suggest you ask Nelson Dollar, Paul Stam, Marylin Avila, Richard Stevens and Neal Hunt and the Republicans running for the BOC where they stand on vouchers and publish that here.

And then there is the inconvenient truth...NC's constitution guarantees a free K-12 public education to every student. Oh well whats a constitution among friends?

One issue at a time. First we get rid of the Status Quo Seven, then we set about driving 'Change' in our school system.

[DarylB]

...NC's constitution guarantees a free K-12 public education to every student. Oh well whats a constitution among friends?

I'd hardly call public education in Wake county free.... it's just borrowed money from their future, like all other big government promises of Utopia. Perhaps you'd like to tell us how that "free lunch" you keep offering squares with all the bond issues you've been dreaming of, including the Billion dollar one you and your "Friends of Wake County" worked so deviously to get this past year.... and of all the coming Billion dollar bonds you've promised your supporters as a quid pro quo for the seat you seek.

I still haven't seen you supporting my 15 points toward a more efficient school system... you know what I mean. Or are you still holding to that "talk to me once I'm elected, and we'll see" malarky?

[StanN]

Here is an excellent summary of the pro's and con's of vouchers. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_vouchers#Proponents

Don said I oppose them because..."It's mostly just party ideology. Teacher unions consistently fight vouchers because if there was true school choice many of their jobs would be threatened (or at least they think so). These unions are big contributors to Dem campaigns. 'nuff said."

But Don knows that long before I ever thought of running for office, I was against vouchers. To me, the con's overwhelm the pro's. While I can't speak for the others listed, I know several well enough to believe that it is a matter of conviction.

Those that support vouchers KNOW they are right. Hmmm...

If vouchers were a popular idea you would see NC Republicans pushing hard for them. I haven't heard peep out of the right wing of the Wake BOC or other local Republican candidates on vouchers. Even McCrory has taken only a tentative toe in the water position.

Either the local pols know vouchers are not supported by other than a small minority of Wake's citizens or they just don't believe in them.
I suggest you ask Nelson Dollar, Paul Stam, Marylin Avila, Richard Stevens and Neal Hunt and the Republicans running for the BOC where they stand on vouchers and publish that here.

And then there is the inconvenient truth...NC's constitution guarantees a free K-12 public education to every student. Oh well whats a constitution among friends?

One issue at a time. First we get rid of the Status Quo Seven, then we set about driving 'Change' in our school system.

What odds are you offering on getting rid of the seven you dislike?

[JoeCiulla]

Here is an excellent summary of the pro's and con's of vouchers. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_vouchers#Proponents

Don said I oppose them because..."It's mostly just party ideology. Teacher unions consistently fight vouchers because if there was true school choice many of their jobs would be threatened (or at least they think so). These unions are big contributors to Dem campaigns. 'nuff said."

But Don knows that long before I ever thought of running for office, I was against vouchers. To me, the con's overwhelm the pro's. While I can't speak for the others listed, I know several well enough to believe that it is a matter of conviction.

Those that support vouchers KNOW they are right. Hmmm...

If vouchers were a popular idea you would see NC Republicans pushing hard for them. I haven't heard peep out of the right wing of the Wake BOC or other local Republican candidates on vouchers. Even McCrory has taken only a tentative toe in the water position.

Either the local pols know vouchers are not supported by other than a small minority of Wake's citizens or they just don't believe in them.
I suggest you ask Nelson Dollar, Paul Stam, Marylin Avila, Richard Stevens and Neal Hunt and the Republicans running for the BOC where they stand on vouchers and publish that here.

And then there is the inconvenient truth...NC's constitution guarantees a free K-12 public education to every student. Oh well whats a constitution among friends?

One issue at a time. First we get rid of the Status Quo Seven, then we set about driving 'Change' in our school system.

What odds are you offering on getting rid of the seven you dislike?

All of them? Nil. Enough to swing the majority? Pretty good.

[Brent]

And then there is the inconvenient truth...NC's constitution guarantees a free K-12 public education to every student.

I'm not particularly a fan of vouchers as they're often proposed, but could you please explain how having vouchers would negate the opportunity in your NC Constitutation reference?

[johnshaw]

I don’t know the actual numbers – I will have to rely on those that others have published. But we should remember that the cost is non-linear. That is, if the cost per student is $X, the savings by removing one student from the public school (presumably to send him or her to a private school) is something less that $X. Part of the reason is that there is a certain cost to operating the school that is not based on cost per student (at least not linear).

Transferring a student from public to private school saves the tax payer less than one might think.

Also, unless the value of the voucher is equal to the full cost of the tuition and other expenses, the use of vouchers will favor families who can afford to spend some other there money on expenses not cover.

Also, public schools have to accept all students. Private schools can be selective. If vouchers are used, they should only be used for schools that accept all students.

[DarylB]

Also, public schools have to accept all students. Private schools can be selective. If vouchers are used, they should only be used for schools that accept all students.

It's really of no particular concern where the kid goes if he is no longer in the public system. We don't tell people in other endeavors where they have to spend their money, such as how they spend their income tax refund, or which drug store they have to use for a Medicare prescription. All kids need an education, and they should be able to go to a better, more selective school if they're qualified to do so. We really don't have to "dumb down" every kid, just so the ones who aren't as bright can feel good. The watering down of the intellect among the main reasons families are fleeing the public schools. Why else would a family spend so much time and effort? A total lack of concern for the will of the families being serviced is one more reason. The fiscal irresponsibililty of WCPSS, and public schools generally is another big issue. And the intransigence of those in authority is yet another. Families aren't leaving just for sport, they're being chased away. All public education has to do is stop administering in such an arrogant and irresponsible way. It's as simple as that....

[JoeCiulla]

I don’t know the actual numbers – I will have to rely on those that others have published. But we should remember that the cost is non-linear. That is, if the cost per student is $X, the savings by removing one student from the public school (presumably to send him or her to a private school) is something less that $X. Part of the reason is that there is a certain cost to operating the school that is not based on cost per student (at least not linear).

Transferring a student from public to private school saves the tax payer less than one might think.

Also, unless the value of the voucher is equal to the full cost of the tuition and other expenses, the use of vouchers will favor families who can afford to spend some other there money on expenses not cover.

Also, public schools have to accept all students. Private schools can be selective. If vouchers are used, they should only be used for schools that accept all students.

John,

Agree with your first point. There is a fixed/variable ratio to the school system's cost structure, and every student voucher which drives enrollment below the current level has some effect on cost per student.

But the School Board screams every year that they don't have the funding and capacity to keep up with growth. At least for now, the viability of bonds we have already approved is in question due to tight credit markets.

So, wouldn't some sort of a managed voucher program help resolve the School Board's capacity concerns and give more parents a choice?

There are more and more private schools opening up in Wake County all the time. Having vouchers doesn't mean the best students are skimmed off the top. Several of the private schools specialize in supporting kids with learning disabilities, some of those students would leave too.

BTW, Given a school system which is not dysfunctional, I'm not a big fan of vouchers either. But the School Board themselves make a good argument for them.

[MattD]

First we get rid of the Status Quo Seven, then we set about driving 'Change' in our school system.

For those that don't know, and so we are all talking about the same people, please list the names you consider to be the Status Quo Seven. Thanks.

[chaboard]

If the $9K per pupil estimate is correct for the WCPSS, then a formula similar to the following could be used to estimate voucher payments that would result in a net increase in per pupil public school funding:

Let X=current # of private school students
Let Y=current # of public school students
Let Z=proposed voucher payment
Let q=change in students (# moving from public to private, * the only real unknown)
Assume $9K per pupil cost for WCPSS

((Y-q) * 9000) + (q * (9000-Z)) >= (X+q) * Z


Ok, so you asked me what was wrong here. I think the error is in this original inequality.I don't think it reflects what you wanted it to reflect. You have the form A + B >= C.
Translating back to word problem form:
A = Public COST of public school students after transfers
B = Nominal Public SAVINGS on the students who do transfer
C = Public COST of vouchers to every private school student

I don't think it makes sense to ADD a cost term and a savings term on your RHS,
and thus the results you get when you solve it don't make much sense.

I think what you really want is something like:
((Y-q)*9000) + ((X+q)*Z) >= Y*9000 + X*0
or, in English:
(new cost of public students + new cost of private students) >=
(old cost of public students + old cost of private students)

Of course this formulation assumes linear savings - which is almost certanly not
the case - but it gives a first approximation


9000Y - 9000q + 9000q - Zq >= ZX +Zq

9000Y >= ZX + 2ZQ
9000Y >= Z(X+2Q)
9000 / Z >= (X+2Q) / Y

I think all your subsequent math is ok, thus also pointing to a flaw in the original problem statement. Although the ex math teacher in me insists on pointing out that if either Y or Z is negative then you'd have to reverse the inequality upon performing the division. But given what they represent it's fair to assume they are non-negative. ;)

[JoeCiulla]

First we get rid of the Status Quo Seven, then we set about driving 'Change' in our school system.

For those that don't know, and so we are all talking about the same people, please list the names you consider to be the Status Quo Seven. Thanks.

Matt,

Here's the total roster of candidates for/against at-large, I italicized the Status Quo Seven....

Supports At-Large Against At-Large
NC House District 33 Paul Terrell Dan Blue
NC House District 34 Joseph Ross Grier Martin
NC House District 35 Eric Weaver Jennifer Weiss
NC House District 36 Nelson Dollar Al Swanstrom
NC House District 37 Paul Stam Ed Ridpath
NC House District 38 Susan Hogarth Deborah Ross
NC House District 39 Duane Cutlip Linda Coleman
NC House District 40 Marilyn Avila Stan Morse
NC House District 41 Bryan Gossage Ty Harrell
NC Senate District 14 Carol Bennett Vernon Malone
NC Senate District 15 Neal Hunt Chris Mintz
NC Senate District 16 John Alexander Josh Stein
NC Senate District 17 Richard Stevens
County Comm 04 Kenn Gardner Stan Norwalk
County Comm 05 Venita Peyton Harold Webb
County Comm 06 Larry F. Tilley Betty Lou Ward

A number of candidates did their level-best to dodge the question. Candidates I'm listing as "For at-large" are those who have written or told me that they support it, without attaching other conditions.

Rgds,
Joe

[StanN]

And then there is the inconvenient truth...NC's constitution guarantees a free K-12 public education to every student.

I'm not particularly a fan of vouchers as they're often proposed, but could you please explain how having vouchers would negate the opportunity in your NC Constitutation reference?

Here is the inconvenient truth of NC's constitution. BTW, we are one of the few states with such a clause.

Sec. 2. Uniform system of schools.
(1) General and uniform system: term. The General Assembly shall provide by taxation and otherwise for a general and uniform system of free public schools, which shall be maintained at least nine months in every year, and wherein equal opportunities shall be provided for all students.
(2) Local responsibility. The General Assembly may assign to units of local government such responsibility for the financial support of the free public schools as it may deem appropriate. The governing boards of units of local government with financial responsibility for public education may use local revenues to add to or supplement any public school or post-secondary school program.

I'm not a lawyer, but it seems to me that a voucher system would provide for schools that are not free and would be far from uniform. As elsewhere, vouchers would be mostly used by affluent parents for private and religious schools, leaving the poorer parents to the public schools.

It is widely accepted that schools with a high pct. of kids from low income families are not equal schools, i.e. their educational performance is poorer.

IMO, that is because the best teachers which are needed in such schools, typically refuse to teach in them. CMS and others propose bribes, excuse me...monetary incentives, to get good teachers into bad schools.

Whether I'm right or wrong is immaterial vis-a-vis the constitution.

[DarylB]

If the $9K per pupil estimate is correct for the WCPSS.....

According to one of the candidates for County Commissioner (StanN), back in 2004, the cost per seat was $15,000....and that was in 2004!

It costs at least $15,000 per new school seat.
http://carypolitics.org/forums/showthread.php?t=413
post # 1

then a formula similar to the following could be used to estimate voucher payments that would result in a net increase in per pupil public school funding:

Let X=current # of private school students
Let Y=current # of public school students
Let Z=proposed voucher payment
Let q=change in students (# moving from public to private, * the only real unknown)
Assume $9K per pupil cost for WCPSS

((Y-q) * 9000) + (q * (9000-Z)) >= (X+q) * Z


Ok, so you asked me what was wrong here. I think the error is in this original inequality.

NO, I think the error here is to be found in the amount that WCPSS spends wastefully, which is not in your formula. The private schools could and do use money for educating children much more effectively. Why should the private schools be punished and shorted the amount they receive on a voucher, and the public schools rewarded for their excesses, by only giving a percentage to a private school and letting WCPSS waste the rest?

And to top it off, we all know how loudly and vigorously Stan has crowed with his other "Friends of Wake County" for additional billion dollar school bonds in the future, because, "we're behind in spending, other states spend a lot more than we do, and we have to catch up.."

Stan Norwalk... wrong for education, wrong for your children, and wrong for Wake County.

[Wuptdo]

Seems to me the best and the cheapest way to "solve the problem" is to change the State Constitution.

With the new "Global Economy" what North Carolina need is low-skill/low-wage workers to be competitive in the world labor market (according to the NC Bankers Association Report from a few years back). When 80% of all jobs in America can be done by folks with an 8th grade education or less, let only the brightest and best go on to High School, then college. Your kid not to bright and you still want them to go to high school, fine, but you pay for it. Believe me, you want to see parents that care, have them pay for that education and they will care. Pursing a college degree with no benefit to society (lawyer, journalist, English Major) than you pay 3 times the amount for tuition. Going for a Math, Science, technical degree where society will benefit; your tuition is greatly reduced.

Heck, I understand from an associate that there are 14 year old's in India and Pakistan that can write computer code better and faster than the best "highly educated" (and highly paid) programmers at SAS. The current American Education system is no more than a bloated bureaucracy more interested in maintaining itself (status quo) than educating children for the new era. That is the kind of CHANGE this country needs.

[JoeCiulla]

And then there is the inconvenient truth...NC's constitution guarantees a free K-12 public education to every student.

I'm not particularly a fan of vouchers as they're often proposed, but could you please explain how having vouchers would negate the opportunity in your NC Constitutation reference?

Here is the inconvenient truth of NC's constitution. BTW, we are one of the few states with such a clause.

Sec. 2. Uniform system of schools.
(1) General and uniform system: term. The General Assembly shall provide by taxation and otherwise for a general and uniform system of free public schools, which shall be maintained at least nine months in every year, and wherein equal opportunities shall be provided for all students.
(2) Local responsibility. The General Assembly may assign to units of local government such responsibility for the financial support of the free public schools as it may deem appropriate. The governing boards of units of local government with financial responsibility for public education may use local revenues to add to or supplement any public school or post-secondary school program.

I'm not a lawyer, but it seems to me that a voucher system would provide for schools that are not free and would be far from uniform. As elsewhere, vouchers would be mostly used by affluent parents for private and religious schools, leaving the poorer parents to the public schools.

It is widely accepted that schools with a high pct. of kids from low income families are not equal schools, i.e. their educational performance is poorer.

IMO, that is because the best teachers which are needed in such schools, typically refuse to teach in them. CMS and others propose bribes, excuse me...monetary incentives, to get good teachers into bad schools.

Whether I'm right or wrong is immaterial vis-a-vis the constitution.

Interesting that you referenced the same section of our constitution as the lawyers for WakeCARES. The schools are not uniform today.

True leaders wouldn't decide that since the constitution says something can't be done that we just live with it -- true leaders change the constitution via the legislative process if it means doing the right thing.

Our public schools can't keep up with growth, and the School Board themselves admit it. Wouldn't you at least consider a constitutional ammendment which would allow for vouchers to address enrollment growth?

[DarylB]

...it seems to me that a voucher system would provide for schools that are not free...

That's true Stan, but not for the reason you assume. If the schools receiving the vouchers can actually educate kids for less than the value of the vouchers (ie what the public schools spend), they're actually turning a PROFIT. We don't need to pay more for our schools, we need to make our schools educate the kids for the real cost of their education. That means we don't need a zillion 6 and 7 digit incomed superintendents, we don't need a bus roundhouse for social engineering experiments, and we don't need a county commissioner that wants more of the same "tax and spend" with our tax dollars. Those many wasteful things being funded today aren't in the Constitution, but they are on your agenda, and they are in your current version of the budget.

[StanN]

If the $9K per pupil estimate is correct for the WCPSS.....

According to one of the candidates for County Commissioner (StanN), back in 2004, the cost per seat was $15,000....and that was in 2004!

It costs at least $15,000 per new school seat.
http://carypolitics.org/forums/showthread.php?t=413
post # 1

then a formula similar to the following could be used to estimate voucher payments that would result in a net increase in per pupil public school funding:

Let X=current # of private school students
Let Y=current # of public school students
Let Z=proposed voucher payment
Let q=change in students (# moving from public to private, * the only real unknown)
Assume $9K per pupil cost for WCPSS

((Y-q) * 9000) + (q * (9000-Z)) >= (X+q) * Z


Ok, so you asked me what was wrong here. I think the error is in this original inequality.

NO, I think the error here is to be found in the amount that WCPSS spends wastefully, which is not in your formula. The private schools could and do use money for educating children much more effectively. Why should the private schools be punished and shorted the amount they receive on a voucher, and the public schools rewarded for their excesses, by only giving a percentage to a private school and letting WCPSS waste the rest?

And to top it off, we all know how loudly and vigorously Stan has crowed with his other "Friends of Wake County" for additional billion dollar school bonds in the future, because, "we're behind in spending, other states spend a lot more than we do, and we have to catch up.."

Stan Norwalk... wrong for education, wrong for your children, and wrong for Wake County.

You guys got your numbers all screwed up. $15,000 WAS the cost of constructing a seat in a standard permanent school (more for high schools). A few months ago it was up to $30,000 per seat..due to the very fast rising cost of land and building materials...(actually design standards were reduced about two years ago by the BOE).

The cost of operating that school approaches roughly $8,000. That is mostly teachers/principals/other staff/supplies and also includes debt service. Very roughly from memory..the $8,000 breaks down to 60% from the state, 35% from the county and <5% from the feds.

Still, your number juggling does not trump the constitution. Mike is right ...excuse me..correct, you have to change the constitution.

[DarylB]

A little reminder, from Joe, in a post back in June....

Here we go, again. From todays NandO:

http://www.newsobserver.com/news/story/1095659.html (http://www.newsobserver.com/news/story/1095659.html)


Goal is more grads, cost is huge
Wake schools leaders want 90 percent of students graduating by 2013, but the county balks at the cost
T. Keung Hui, Staff Writer

RALEIGH - At least 90 percent of Wake County high school students could graduate from high school -- provided there's a massive boost in money, school leaders say.

The school board agreed Tuesday to set the goal of having 90 percent of students graduating from high school by 2013 and 95 percent by 2015. But the board tied that goal with an increase in county money, possibly as much as an 80 percent increase over the next six years. (more above)

Best quote:
"School board member Lori Millberg argued that the school board can't trust commissioners."

It that isn't the pot calling the kettle black, I don't know what is.

Bottom line: The actually responsibility for graduation rates is the STATE, not the counties. If you want higher graduations rates, then the STATE should provide the money, not the counties.

Also, will someone explain to me why Del Burns is the 2nd highest paid bureaucrat in all of North Carolina, right behind the Lottery Director. Also, if Del is so well paid, why did he just add another layer of management authority under him ($350,000 per year). For all that money he is getting ($260,000 plus bonus) I expect to see a 60 hour work week or higher (much like most of the self-employed I know). Heck, he makes more money than Governor.

The BoE do themselves no favors in this department. Last year, new enrollments were well under what had been planned and funded. What did they do with the extra money? If they used it to fund new programs or improve graduation rates, nobody knew about it. Or, they could have made just a small gesture of fiscal responsibility and given the money back to the county. They did neither. They have provided no explanation for what happened to the money.

And they want taxing authority.

My gut feel is that a token amount, as in last years and previous years operating budget will be offered by the BOC so as to deflect public criticism from the true problem.

Cr@p like this will not take place on my watch. It can be put to an end simply by exposing it for what it is.

Now, with our economy in disarray, and home prices falling nationwide, enrollments down, and WCPSS hit with one spending scandal aftera another, and I have to ask, "Is this the philosophy we want on our county commission"?

Let me quote mayself here, from back in April....
Wake county schools are not underfunded, they are OVERSPENT. What we have is not a revenue problem, what we have is a spending problem. Stan's race with the rest of the country to spend the most of any state in the union is akin to the old nuclear arms race, in which we all had enough in the way of weaponry to wipe out the world many times, but it came down to an ego contest as to who could do so the most times over. And so it is with Stan and school spending. Stan, please listen closely, it isn't how MUCh we spend, it's how WELL we spend it!

Stan Norwalk --- throwing money at the problem till it hurts. His reply back in April was that New York spends the most, $14,884 per student. But he wants us to be #1 in spending in the country. That's his desire, to make Raleigh/Wake County the New York of the South... but are you really ready for all the spending of a Wall Street styled county commissioner?

[Brent]

Here is the inconvenient truth of NC's constitution. BTW, we are one of the few states with such a clause.

Sec. 2. Uniform system of schools.
(1) General and uniform system: term. The General Assembly shall provide by taxation and otherwise for a general and uniform system of free public schools, which shall be maintained at least nine months in every year, and wherein equal opportunities shall be provided for all students.
(2) Local responsibility. The General Assembly may assign to units of local government such responsibility for the financial support of the free public schools as it may deem appropriate. The governing boards of units of local government with financial responsibility for public education may use local revenues to add to or supplement any public school or post-secondary school program.

I'm not a lawyer, but it seems to me that a voucher system would provide for schools that are not free and would be far from uniform. As elsewhere, vouchers would be mostly used by affluent parents for private and religious schools, leaving the poorer parents to the public schools.

It is widely accepted that schools with a high pct. of kids from low income families are not equal schools, i.e. their educational performance is poorer.

IMO, that is because the best teachers which are needed in such schools, typically refuse to teach in them. CMS and others propose bribes, excuse me...monetary incentives, to get good teachers into bad schools.

Whether I'm right or wrong is immaterial vis-a-vis the constitution.

I see nothing "inconvenient" about the cited clause of the NC Constitution.

You have demonstrated nothing that indicates that vouchers would violate this clause.

If vouchers happen to be provided, that does not mean that free, uniform public schools won't also still be provided for all students who wish to take advantage of them.

You make several assumptions about who would use vouchers and where they would be used. There is nothing whatsoever to require that that be the result, if vouchers existed.

What if vouchers were offered only to educationally/economically disadvantaged students? Do you find that unconstitutional also?

Again, I'm not advocating for vouchers. I am saying that if they existed, that would not mean in any way that free, uniform public education wouldn't still be provided by the state.

[Brent]

you have to change the constitution.

No convincing evidence that this statement is correct has been offered.

Offering vouchers doesn't mean that the state can't/won't continue to offer a free, "uniform" public education.

[JoeCiulla]

Still, your number juggling does not trump the constitution. Mike is right ...excuse me..correct, you have to change the constitution.

Stan,
I think we all agree that legislation would be required to support vouchers. Given our own School Board has admittedly struggled to meet growth, and given the challenges we face today raising capital to build new schools, would you support vouchers?

[Icorpse]

Still, your number juggling does not trump the constitution. Mike is right ...excuse me..correct, you have to change the constitution.

Stan,
I think we all agree that legislation would be required to support vouchers. Given our own School Board has admittedly struggled to meet growth, and given the challenges we face today raising capital to build new schools, would you support vouchers?

Excellent point. I think first we have to agree on where vouchers can be used. I say that they should be restricted for use in public and charter schools that do not engage in "selection" of students. I think Obama's stand on the issue last night was right on the money. We owe our children a good education and if conventional public schools cannot deliver (as in DC) then we should expose them to competition through charter schools and by giving parents a choice. A step beyond that would be an all voucher system as in Utah. If you really believe that you r child would have a better shot in life by attending a public school, then by all means put you voucher to use in one.

For the record, I have met black parents from Garner that drive all the way to Morrisville to drop their kids off to school. Parents care and are fed up with what is going on in WCPSS.

[StanN]

Seems to me the best and the cheapest way to "solve the problem" is to change the State Constitution.

With the new "Global Economy" what North Carolina need is low-skill/low-wage workers to be competitive in the world labor market (according to the NC Bankers Association Report from a few years back). When 80% of all jobs in America can be done by folks with an 8th grade education or less, let only the brightest and best go on to High School, then college. Your kid not to bright and you still want them to go to high school, fine, but you pay for it. Believe me, you want to see parents that care, have them pay for that education and they will care. Pursing a college degree with no benefit to society (lawyer, journalist, English Major) than you pay 3 times the amount for tuition. Going for a Math, Science, technical degree where society will benefit; your tuition is greatly reduced.

Heck, I understand from an associate that there are 14 year old's in India and Pakistan that can write computer code better and faster than the best "highly educated" (and highly paid) programmers at SAS. The current American Education system is no more than a bloated bureaucracy more interested in maintaining itself (status quo) than educating children for the new era. That is the kind of CHANGE this country needs.

What absolute nonsense! Is that what you advise your children? Or is your advice just for others?

Here are some sobering statistics from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The national unemployment rate has reached over 6.1%. 9.6% for those lacking a HS degree. 6.3% for those with a HS degree and 2.5% for those with a Bachelor's degree or higher.

The rate for the Raleigh-Cary MSA is 5.4% compared to the 6.1% national average. The usual trades promoted by many right-wing candidates, i.e. carpentry, plumbing, electrical...are the hardest hit.

That data does not include part-time or marginally attached workers. Including those would roughly double the above, particularly among the least educated.

And we haven't yet reached the bottom of the recession.

[DarylB]

The rate for the Raleigh-Cary MSA is 5.4% compared to the 6.1% national average. The usual trades promoted by many right-wing candidates, i.e. carpentry, plumbing, electrical...are the hardest hit.



And don't count on Barack Obama doing any favors for Joe, the plumber......he just told poor Joe that he's rich, and that he's going to "spread his wealth around".

So if plumbing is one of the hardest hit, why don't you do something about that? Isn't it wrong to push so many into college, where many will incur a large debt and in many cases no marketable skills to show for it, instead of perhaps gaining valuable training we need when that toilet doesn't work, or when the WHBA wants to build another home? The WCPSS seems to be training EVERY kid for college... is that wise? If we prepare the tribe with all chiefs, and no indians, how is that a good thing?

Shouldn't our public school systems diversity policy be more than just a map of the bus routes?

[Wuptdo]

Stan wrote:
"What absolute nonsense! Is that what you advise your children? Or is your advice just for others?

Here are some sobering statistics from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The national unemployment rate has reached over 6.1%. 9.6% for those lacking a HS degree. 6.3% for those with a HS degree and 2.5% for those with a Bachelor's degree or higher.

The rate for the Raleigh-Cary MSA is 5.4% compared to the 6.1% national average. The usual trades promoted by many right-wing candidates, i.e. carpentry, plumbing, electrical...are the hardest hit.

That data does not include part-time or marginally attached workers. Including those would roughly double the above, particularly among the least educated.

And we haven't yet reached the bottom of the recession."

ROFL -- "absolute nonsense!" -- exactly what most folks think of your post, Stan.

You want to see "unemployment" drop like a rock for American's/North Carolinian's/Wake County? The solution is very, very simple -- FUND and ENFORCE the current Immigration Laws.

Image Stan if you can, 300-400K illegal aliens leaving just North Carolina alone. How well educated are those folks, Stan. Heck, from what I been told by a social worker (and teachers in WCPSS), they can't even read in their native tongue, so why do we bother publishing "state/county" forms in those languages? Seems to me, the real problem is not lack of jobs, but surplus 'illegal' population that helps keep wages low.

The fact that North Carolina can absorb 300-400K uneducated/illiterate workers is a good indication to me that we need low-skill/low-wage workers. So why bother educating those low-skill/low-wage workers beyond a certain point (7/8th Grade?) The fallacy that everyone needs a high school education has been "sold" to the American public as a way to keep the money flowing into "Big Ed."

A little food for thought Stan. You are about 2 heartbeats away from the living your "golden years" in a nursing home. Do you think that some nice young person who just graduated from Apex High School is going to work for $11 per hour, wiping your butt, feeding you, and cleaning your sheets?

Bottom line: A capitalistic economic system will always have income stratification.

###

As a candidate Stan, I have a question: Will you as a WCC do all in your power to enforce and fund the immigration laws of our Nation/State/County. (I'm sure Sheriff Donnie would like to know as well). Tip O'neal once said; "all politics is local."

[Icorpse]

News from Utah....charter schools far outperform public schools in "No Child Left Behind" tests.

http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_10656141


Charter schools far outshine public in 'No Child Left Behind' standards
By Ben Fulton
The Salt Lake Tribune
Salt Lake Tribune
Article Last Updated:10/07/2008 06:49:43 AM MDT
Utah's charter schools performed far better than their traditional public school counterparts in meeting Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) goals for the federal education program No Child Left Behind.
Eighty percent of Utah's public schools met AYP goals for the 2007-08 school year, with far more meeting those goals by appeal than the previous year. By contrast, 95 percent of the 58 Utah charter schools tested met the federal requirements, with only one charter appealing, according to results released last week by the State Office of Education. Between 27,000 and 32,000 Utah students attend charter schools, which this year number 68.
Utah charter schools also outperformed traditional public schools on the Utah Performance Assessment System for Students (U-PASS) test, a state complement to AYP. Ninety-three percent of charter schools passed, compared with 87 percent of traditional schools.
Rather than tout their higher pass rates, though, most charter school administrators point to differences that may weigh in their favor. AYP requires that schools meet goals across all 10 subgroups of students in order to pass. Subgroups include special education students, English Language Learners (ELL) and groups defined as "disadvantaged minorities."
Data compiled by the state show that in traditional public schools, 39 percent are "economically disadvantaged," 12 percent are a "disadvantaged minority," and almost 11 percent are students with special education needs. The charter school numbers: 24 percent "economically disadvantaged," 8 percent "disadvantaged minority" and slightly more than 10 percent special needs. The state office could not provide current ELL enrollment figures.
Sonia Woodbury, director of City Academy charter school in Salt Lake City, said her 185 students represent many subgroups, but some are small enough to be statistically insignificant for purposes of meeting federal goals. City Academy met AYP requirements this year and last.
"We have them all, pretty much, but they're smaller," Woodbury said. "The way that's calculated in AYP can sometimes make it easier for charter schools."
Judy Park, associate superintendent at the State Office of Education, said that in general, public schools tend to enroll more subgroups at greater numbers. That makes passing AYP more difficult.
"If your school has 10 of those subgroups, there's 10 ways you can pass or fail in order to meet AYP," Park said. "What percentage of charter schools have ESL learners?"
Although both draw on public funds, charter schools don't have geographic boundaries and operate under a specified charter based on student needs and interests. Also, charter schools are often smaller in both school and classroom size.
Rebecca Raybould, who analyzes AYP tests for charter schools, agrees that from a statistical standpoint, the number of subgroups and their size make meeting the requirement easier for charters. Still, she said comparing public and charter school AYP performance makes for uneven comparison. AYP and U-PASS often skip certain grade levels in their assessments, and therefore large groups of students, she pointed out.
"It's detrimental, even though everyone loves to do it," Raybould said. "It splits the point, which is to educate kids."
Brian Allen, chair of Utah's State Charter School Board, said that although he doesn't know details of subgroup distribution at charter schools, public schools would do better to examine what charter schools do well instead of "excusing away" the disparity in AYP goal results. "Charter schools are a fine complement to public schools in the state. We ought to be learning more from each other," Allen said.
Missing the mark
These Utah charter schools did not meet federal Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) goals for No Child Left Behind in 2007-08:
* Fast Forward High, Logan
* Legacy Preparatory Academy, North Salt Lake
* Reagan Academy, Springville
These Utah charter schools did not meet acceptable levels for the Utah Performance Assessment System for Students (U-PASS):
* Fast Forward High, Logan
* C.S. Lewis Academy, Payson
* Dual Immersion Academy
* Pinacle Canyon Academy, Price