ArenaCross at Nutter Center
Midnight Madness pet adoption
DECA team in robot competition
Dayton Daily News education reporter Scott Elliott writes about schools, kids, teaching and learning.
Home > Blogs > Get on the Bus > Archives > 2008 > February > 18 > Entry
Is Obama for or against vouchers?
(Obama with students at Northcentral Wisconsin Technical College.)
It seems that Barack Obama, who told the big national teachers unions last year that he opposed public financing of vouchers for students to attend private schools, has changed his tune.
Campaigning in Wisconsin, where Milwaukee’s popular voucher program sends more than 15 percent of the city’s school children to private schools using vouchers, Obama told the editorial board of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel that he is open to the idea of vouchers if studies end up proving they are effective in raising student achievement.
Obama said he remained a “skeptic” about vouchers, but would reconsider if the research showed otherwise. There has not been a conclusive longitudinal study of the effectiveness of Milwaukee’s voucher program, although a new study is underway.
Rival Hillary Clinton has been highly critical of vouchers, even warning that widespread use of them could even result in public financing for kids to attend schools that teach “jihad.”
This Week in Education’s Alexander Russo points out, however, that this isn’t the first time Obama has spoken this way about vouchers and that he likes to use education as an example of his independence from Democratic orthodoxy.
I suppose it doesn’t hurt to bring this up on the eve of Wisconsin’s hotly contested primary.
This post also appears on the Education Writers Association’s Education Election blog
(Image credit: Wausau Daily Herald)
Permalink | Comments (12) | Categories: Charter Schools and School Choice, Tracking Barack Obama
Comments
By School Supporter (Classic)
February 23, 2008 11:56 PM | Link to this
“they spend about the same per student as DPS,” “DPS needs to operate on a higher dollar amount per pupil,” “correct the figures to account for all of the severely disabled students who attend DPS … DPS may even be spending less” Point taken. When did the board review this data? Who provided it? Did it meet teachermom’s criteria for demonstrating that “We are not throwing money out the windows here?” Where is it on the DPS website? Has the board fulfilled its obligation to monitor district effectiveness and communicate with the community?By Oldprof
February 23, 2008 10:07 AM | Link to this
Classic, a 1993 article gives me nothing regarding current conditions. Moreover, again, privates admit selectively—and their rejects default to the public schools, which accounts for the differences in quality. Now, as for costs—yes, it looks like CJ is spending an average of over $8K/student and DPS is around $12K. Now, correct the figures to account for all of the severely disabled students who attend DPS (CJ is not equipped for them, you know, and therefore does not admit them). When we compare populations of similar students, the spending is equal—in fact, DPS may even be spending less.By teachermom
February 23, 2008 8:22 AM | Link to this
The REASON DPS needs to operate on a higher dollar amount per pupil is simply because WE CAN’T PICK AND CHOOSE who we educate. Get your facts straight. We teach mentally challenged and emotionally disturbed students where private schools typically do NOT. Not to mention we are the hub for the county/region for educating the visual and hearing impaired plus more. It’s much MORE EXPENSIVE to teach these children because of special needs equipment and the lower teacher to student ratio mandates for these students imposed by the state. We are not throwing money out the windows here. So get your facts straight and know what you are talking about before you open your mouth next time.By School Supporter (Classic)
February 22, 2008 12:40 AM | Link to this
Isn’t CJ running $4K less than DPS? $8K total cost for CJ, $12K for DPS (operating money only). Here are references for citizenship: “Catholic schools offer model for public counterparts” http://chronicle.uchicago.edu/931014/bryk.shtml “Catholic Schools and the Common Good,” Anthony S. Bryk, Valerie E. Lee, Peter Blakeley Holland (See the chapter “Catholic Lessons for America’s Schools”)By Oldprof
February 21, 2008 4:51 PM | Link to this
Classic, I’m a little confused by your analysis. Private schools produce better citizens? Well, they get to select their students and generally admit only those who already have had some good upbringing at home—when they take in former public school students, we’ve not seen the same production. They do it at less cost? Tuition plus endowment funds at CJ mean that they spend about the same per student as DPS; the pricier privates (the “best” ones) run upwards of $30K for a year of tuition now. You might want to re-think your conclusions in the light of this more accurate data.By null
February 20, 2008 9:56 PM | Link to this
Hey Scott is there any way to find out how many heat/snow days have been used by other school districts. I know Dayton has gone over but some of the other districts must be close to their 5 by now.By School Supporter (Classic)
February 20, 2008 4:01 AM | Link to this
Rich writes, “it would be better to hear a clear commitment to an excellent PUBLIC education system for all students, with an equally clear statement on what that means regarding vouchers.” Oldprof writes, “Public education worked once …” Parochial schools produce better citizens at lower costs. Certainly there are many reasons for this (including low teacher pay), but where is the even-handed benchmarking and lessons-learned we would expect to see if the parochials were setting an example worthy of emulation. For example, parochials are more likely to follow the core curricula which Oldprof recommends (cf “grammar school”). If failure to benchmark results in substandard schooling, that must be fixed or parents must be given an exit path. Ohio’s constitution does not provide for funding an unthorough and inefficient system of public schools. Senator Obama is right; Senator Clinton’s analysis is a discredit to her alma mater.By Oldprof
February 19, 2008 9:44 PM | Link to this
Rich, you’re making some sharp points today! Vouchers, of course, have been in effect in higher education since the 1970s (in the guise of Pell Grants/OIC grants and such like). The yield has been negative. So many bogus trade schools leached off the charter vein that Bill Bennett had to try, as Sec. of Ed., to staunch the bleeding—which he did (far from well) by creating a system of paperwork that itself has sucked funds away from instruction and into the financial aid sector. And even if every kid had a voucher, it would not serve—the private schools have insufficient space for all of them (and they will kick out any that they don’t want). Like it or not, public education will continue to be the only option for a wide range of students. Public education worked once—back in the days when politicians considered it sacrosanct and citizens expected it to be funded generously. When will we quit trying to re-invent and instead go back to that wheel???By Rich
February 19, 2008 1:28 PM | Link to this
Scott, I’ve tried numerous times to get the DDN to explain why comments submitted to its blogs are required to have a name and e-mail address provided, yet posts from OBVIOUSLY bogus e-mail addresses continue to be allowed. Can you please explain? One comment earlier today bears the address “none@none.org”, which I’m pretty sure doesn’t exist. If you want to allow anonymous comments, fine, but why pretend that “Your e-mail address IS REQUIRED”, as stated here, when it obviously isn’t?By Rich
February 19, 2008 11:41 AM | Link to this
Just visited Obama’s official campaign website, looking for position papers on education, and found three items likely to address vouchers. The word “voucher” doesn’t appear on his main education policy page, nor does it appear anywhere in his lengthy PDF document on K-12 education entitled “Barack Obama’s Plan for Lifetime Success Through Education”. The one-and-only time I found the word “voucher” was midway through the text of a speech given in Manchester NH on 11/20/2007. In that lone reference, he said “It will require a willingness to break free from the same debates that Washington has been engaged in for decades - Democrat versus Republican; vouchers versus the status quo; more money versus more accountability.” Incidentally, the “It” he was referring to was a “…truly historic commitment to education - a real commitment…”, stated in the preceding sentence of that speech. Obama doesn’t seem to clearly stake out a position on vouchers per se, but he does apparently leave the door open to consider ideas that go beyond what he deems the old, tired, predictable positions spouted by opponents for years. That’s hard to criticize, but it would be better to hear a clear commitment to an excellent PUBLIC education system for all students, with an equally clear statement on what that means regarding vouchers. I’m also troubled a bit by misleading either/or statements — a break from the status quo doesn’t necessarily lead you to accept (or reject) vouchers as good public policy, nor does the need for more money necessarily lead to resistance to “accountability”, whatever is meant by that.By School Supporter (Classic)
February 19, 2008 10:39 AM | Link to this
Ohio’s legislators weren’t intimidated by the insurmountable barrier Senator Clinton suggests. Their solution: “ensure that the principles of democracy and ethics are emphasized and discussed wherever appropriate in all parts of the curriculum for grades kindergarten through twelve.” This applies to regular school districts and voucher-eligible schools. Too bad for poor underserved urban schoolchildren that Senator Clinton views parochial schools as a slippery slope to jihadist madrassasBy Mary
February 19, 2008 7:01 AM | Link to this
Related to this issue is an article in this morning’s USA Today about converting closing Catholic school properties in WAhinton D.C. to “values based” charters. No religious dogma would be taught. Personally, I think the public needs and wants alternatives to traditional public schools.