Throughout Valerie’s writing she uses multiple rhetorical devices to make her argument stronger to persuade the reader. Her first premise is that “Privatized school choice will inevitably reduce funding for your local neighborhood public schools.” She stated that taxpayers are paying for our children’s education and that their money goes with the student whether it be private schools, public schools or charter schools. It is argued by many people that the money is “backpacked” and that the money follows the student to where they go, but it doesn’t affect the public schools. She says in the article that it isn’t true.
All around the United States, there are people who probably never got the chance to go to college, not because they didn’t want to or weren’t motivated enough, but instead they couldn’t afford to go. In his book, The World Is Flat, Thomas L. Friedman talks about globalization, which means that the world is being flattened. What this means is countries are now able to compete with each other. One solution that would help people in a flattening world is free community college for two years. A majority of people have given up on the idea of college simply because it’s too expensive. What if community college was free for two years? Now people wouldn’t have an excuse to not go to college. But will students be as motivated and not slack off
School funding is also based on the school population size. Why should newer schools with high income students get to have a lot more resources then the other schools with low income students. Why is it that lower income schools aren’t given the same resources to help the students? These students with low income do have the same opportunity as the higher income new schools. A lot of those students don’t have access to internet or even have a ride for transportation.
The ACLU would most likely file a lawsuit against any version of this policy if passed because they will say that it violates the separation of church and state because some of the schools that will take students using vouchers provided by the government. A potential harm of this policy is that is it could make it more difficult for children in heavily isolated areas to receive these higher levels of education because it will be difficult for them to have access to a private school. Students in these portions of the state are more likely to be the ones who need public schools than students that live in urban areas. While they will still receive a better education than before, it might not reach the level of the education being received by those in private
Introduction With a recent increase in presidential power and a new presidential cabinet, concerns have began to arise regarding state rights and independence. One of these concerns is school choice in the form of school vouchers. The use of school vouchers has been a state decision, and Texas has always been a school voucher free state. Not only the national government favors private-school voucher legislation (with Betsy DeVos as the new United States Secretary of Education); so does Texas. Texas’ Lieutenant Governor, Dan Patrick, urges the private-school voucher bill (SB 3) to pass the Texas House (as it has already passed the Senate).
This allows school districts with little or no money for building expansions to handle a growing student population and save millions of dollars in construction costs.” (Nair 2). Saving so much money could help schools afford better teaching equipment, which would most likely improve student grades. Next, a drawback is that it could be hard on families if the children have different school schedules. The change could make it difficult to plan a family vacation, go to summer camps,
Donors are donating money to charter schools, and those donors are linked to the government through political campaigns. All this money for charter schools is unfair to public schools, as they usually have more kids than charter schools thus they need more money. Public schools also have more teachers than charter schools, but they receive less money than charter school teachers because all the government funding is going towards charter
Public school funding in America comes from federal, States and local sources, however the majority of those fund comes from local sources, meanly property taxes. The American system creates enormous funding differences between rich and poor community. Richer communities not only have larger property tax bases, but many have higher tax rates. Compare to poor communities with low property taxes bases and low tax rates. When the location and property value influence the allocation of the school fund, it is clear that students living in neighborhoods with least property values will be denied access to the quality of education offered to students living in communities with greater property values.
Charter schools are a different type of school that is helpful to some students but not all. What a charter school is, they are privately managed, taxpayer funded schools which are made up from the community. However charter schools are not like private schools they are in fact outlined after public schools. Charter schools are for students who want to achieve a high level education. The schools are open to all children, they don’t charge tuition and there are no special requirements for them to attend. Charter schools are some of the top-performing schools in the country. Adjusting curriculum to meet student needs. A charter school can break up the day to provide students with more time on the core subjects they need most. Charter school teachers have a
Finally, the school board is worried that this funding and jobs from this program will take away from other school district. This is a non-starter; it was stated that the funding would be private funding. So therefore, the school district can’t rob Peter to pay Paul, they should see this funding as a gift
Government will make more money, families will be less stress free and won’t have to try and survive paycheck to paycheck. Oh, and schools will have to enforce a harder curriculum which will hopefully actually challenge student, and help them in the long run. Schooling already takes up a big portion in people's life. Why not reduce the number of years these kids have to sit in a desk and “learn.” People need to quit complaining about “more education” when there are people dying cancer everyday.
A college education has become a necessity in today’s society. What if college was miraculously free. It would be like going to your public high school without paying that horrendous tuition fee. A lot of people say that free college is a dumb idea because it could potentially flood the market, and Others think it’s a great idea though, because more people would end up going to college because they don’t have to worry about financially paying for it.
Basing school funding on property tax leads to unequal opportunities and environments for students, even though the government may claim it is not up to them, there needs to be a drastic change. Currently, taxes collected from the surrounding communities fund public school districts. Public schools get financed mainly by the property tax of the surrounding houses. “Resources available to school districts relied heavily on local property wealth, and property wealth per pupil varied greatly, as it continues today”
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. The acceptance of school choice has helped many cities find a way to get more students to graduate and thrive. Some charter and private school help states with schooling almost half of their population.