I am sorry that I was not able to attend class today, I was really looking forward to the discussion, but I also wanted to clarify a couple of things as well. So I will begin with my comment in the first post on this topic about the possibility of bullying from kids if they did not have to go to religious events and activities while in a religious private school. The school that my kids went to, had about one day a month where they did not have to wear uniforms, and a few of us parents were called by the principal to ask if our children could refrain from wearing "designer" label jeans on their free days because not all children could afford them and to keep the possibility of bullying down (because the children's parents could not afford name brand jeans), we complied and the next year it was voted on and passed that they could not wear name brand clothing, it was either that or they would take away the no uniform day policy. This prompted some questioning on my part and the kids told me that there are a few kids that get picked on because they seem different in one way or another. That is why I made that comment. I know that if the kid did not have to attend religious events and activities, the other kids would surely know that and they in my thought process would be more apt to be picked on. The Catholic school the kids went to attended mass three days a week, the other kids would know that they did not attend the masses and what would that child be doing while the other children are in mass?
Now on to the quality of education. I have 3 children, all of which did attend Catholic schools. Two of my children were in the gifted student program while in the Catholic schools, and did not even make honor roll in the public schools. However, on the flip side, my other child was barely passing in the Catholic school, and was on the "B" honor roll once in the public schools....Go figure. However, I do think that in my son's case (gifted student), the public school was not really for him, it could not "challenge" him enough and he grew very bored and even got suspended from school once for telling a teacher that his class was lame when the instructor told him to only go so far on a project and stop so that the other kids could catch up to him. As a parent, I had to discipline him for his actions, but at the same time I also had to wonder why should he have to pay the price that the school system could not properly accommodate his needs.
Now as far as the voucher system going to schools, I think I am more inclined to lean towards the favoring of the use of vouchers, only because the schools in the poorer neighborhoods do have problems that we do not think of. The class sizes are larger, they have fewer teachers, and the crime rates tend to be higher within those communities. While I can say thankfully that I have never had to attend school in one of the poor communities, nor have my children, but I do have friends that have served on school boards and heard the horror stories of some of these schools and it was not a pretty picture. I like children and they hold a special place in my heart and I would like to think that all children have the same opportunities, even though they don't. I have given money to help pay for tuition at the Catholic school for less fortunate children and I still do today, even though I no longer have children in school. If there was such a voucher program in the state of Minnesota that would be open throughout the state, I would most likely support that.
There were other points that I could have added my two cents worth I'm sure, but I was saving these for class and I had to miss it....sorry
Tuesday, May 5, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
A lot of your points, on the contrary, make me think that vouchers are a bad idea. Instead of giving money for a few students to avoid the problem, why not use this money to fix what is wrong with public schools. It is a lot of money after all (Something like 26 million?) One issue we addressed today in class was that schools in areas with higher income families already have more financial support because of the way the funding works. Some of us thought that if we have a different system that would distribute the wealth more evenly across the state, public schools might benefit a whole lot more.
ReplyDeleteI guess I'm a little biased in the beginning while reading your post, but I think that using state funded money for religious schools is a big no-no. If there are only religious schools of a certain religion or denomination, it would be equivolent to funding that religion itself. There might be certain benefits, such as lower crime and higher standards, among other things, but in the end does the fact that there are so many other children with mediocre education justify these benefits?