One reason why charter schools are bad, is because they close down other schools. According to washingtonpost.com, “Some of the biggest charter school supporters are simultaneously working to close traditional public schools.” This means that the charter schools are working together to close down the public schools. One argument against this, is that charter schools have no affect about the public schools closing down, but this
Caroline Bird discusses, in “College is a waste of Time and Money,” her opinion on the recurring failure of education in universities. Bird alleges that college is not for everyone, but society forces high school graduates to go to college. College is believed to be the ticket to a successful career, however it some cases it is a waste of time because some classes are worthless. Those who actually decide to go to college, do so because it is a safe haven and it is payed for by parents. It is at the end a waste of time and money, according to Caroline Bird.
Controversy with Head Start goes all the way back to President Johnson because many believe the government should not be paying for anything for the poor. Many people view it as a hand out and are strongly against government handouts to people. People think that the government spend way to much money on it. Some hava the completely opposite view point and think head start is the best program offered to anyone. Some think the government spending money on a system that allows students to get a chance at higher level learning is worth it because they are investing in the kids who will grow and pay taxes one
A Critique of Homeschooling” points out homeschooling undermines the common good in two ways. It withdraws not only children, but social capital from public schools detrimental to the remaining students. It takes away the ability of public education to improve and become more responsive as a democratic institution. Lubienski emphasizes homeschooling will cause the decline of public schools. Lubienski states “It diminishes the potential of public education to serve the common good in a democracy” (207).
School choice is the idea that parents should be able to choose which school they want to send their children to, whether they enroll them to private, charter, parochial or virtual schools, or just decide to homeschool them. “Charter schools are our best hope for meaningful change in education. Yet, many parents are leery of charter schools or confused by them.” (“Should all Schools”) Some politicians and teachers believe that school choice takes away money from them since they do use tax dollars. However, having school choice is crucial for students who cannot learn and thrive in the curriculum or the teaching styles of their school systems. School choice has the potential to raise test scores and grades of low performing students in a traditional public school.
Therefore if the minorities were to be given a better chance and not put directly into special education with assumptions because of their ethnicity. This argument has been my third and final one. Conclusively I am strongly against school tracking because of its many effects on the children. Some of those effects that it brings upon the children is that the lower tracked students may not learn a lot. Also because some students could get educationally misplaced.
Many people think that school uniforms are not a good thing to have in schools. Other people think schools uniforms is a great idea for schools. I think school uniforms should not be acquired at school. The first reason schools uniforms is a terrible idea is because they are expensive for parents. Parents that can 't afford clothes give there kids hand-me-downs can 't afford school uniforms.
A successful democratic society relies incredibly on a successful public school system, because public schools teach students “how to navigate in a democratic society” (Hoffman). Without proper education, citizens are not able to fulfill the fundamentals of democracy--participation and accessibility by and for all citizens. On the other hand, when the standards of democracy are not applied to education, schools may become elitist and class centered by discounting the needs for different learning styles of students. In order for everyone to have an equal chance to participate in political affairs, they need an equal opportunity to gain a fundamental education. The decline of democratic principles in public education has excluded students from successful learning by creating a rigid establishment that provides an unequal advantage to the students that resonate with lessons based on the canon or have the ability to adapt his or her learning style to fit the teachers teaching style.
The United States’, along with many other western countries, government forces us to attend a school that does not promote originality or creativity; but rather mediocrity and conformity. Compulsory public education is a form of social control by definition, attendance is involuntary, it makes the youth simple-minded, and while the opposition may tell you that public school is necessary, this cannot be farther from the truth. First, dictionary.com states that social control is defined as “the enforcement of conformity by society upon its members, either by law or by social pressure.” Without a doubt, the public education system falls under this definition perfectly. It is actually very frightening when thinking critically about this.
Why wouldn't you want all students to be given an equal opportunity to succeed? Some believe that school is strictly for learning academically so that they may be successful out of school. However, many students come from broken homes who hardly see their parents or their parents aren’t in there lives. Many kids who go to high school are homeless or have to juggle adult responsibilities at a younger age, and still try to be success in order to get the same results as kids who are more privileged. The idea of not including life skills class is also supported by the school district having to put in extra work to find new teachers, new classrooms, and new lesson plans.
The establishment of these schools also means the “loss of funding for traditional public schools, leading to fiscal inefficiency” (US Connect). The pro side of this debate will argue that charter schools foster innovation and are worth the loss of funding for traditional schools in the long run, however if this is the case, then why have many charter schools across the nation turned into nothing more than money making opportunities for entrepreneurs with very little interest in educational innovation? Not only are these schools taking away from traditional public schools, but they also discourage students with disabilities by counseling them out instead of providing accommodations. This refusal to serve disabled students means traditional public schools are left with a higher-than-expected concentration of students requiring additional resources because they are mandated by
Mikhail Pinto Composition 2 Dr Campbell 08/03/2016 The bright side of uniforms Uniformity has developed a negative impact on the American society. Unlike nations such as China and Japan, America is a place that provides the students values like individuality and self-expression. These values are most significant among American children, especially when it comes to middle and high school students. This is one of the reasons why uniforms are frowned upon in public schools. At times, some parents and children oppose uniforms in public schools argue that uniforms would take away individuality and not allow the student to show his/her personality through clothing.
Multiple authorizers mean there is no oversight. As there is a continual push for more charter schools in urban communities, so is the push for multiple authorizers. Especially since the argument can be made that, charter schools are better performing in urban areas. But as explained by Green, having multiple authorizers could be more potentially dangerous for charter schools because it has the possibility of leading to poorer performing schools who is not accountable to the students or the parents.