Free State Project Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: [1] 2   Go Down

Author Topic: Ranking states by "best" schools, spending, etc.  (Read 13857 times)

Solitar

  • Guest
Ranking states by "best" schools, spending, etc.
« on: January 01, 2003, 02:45:37 pm »

The following are several sets of data which I've collected and posted elsewhere but decided to put them all into one thread. Feel free to add more indexes, rankings, etc.

Tennessee's "Camelot Index - The Educated Population Component"
Quote
A Camelot-like state has small classes for pubic elementary and secondary education, students who complete high school and perform well on standardized tests, and affordable public colleges. The education component includes the Armed Forces Qualification Test, pupil-teacher ratios, high school completion rates, and higher education tuition and fees. In also includes a composite measures of ACT and SAT scores derived from the rankings in whichever college preparation test is most often taken by residents of each state.
11.0  North Dakota
14.8  Montana
15.4  Wyoming
17.0  Vermont
17.8  Maine
18.4  New Hampshire
21.4  Idaho
23.1  Alaska
23.4  South Dakota
30.6  Delaware
http://www.wnpt.net/tndollars/compare_ed.htm


Average students per school
StatePrimaryMiddleHighOther
Montana160136281921
South Dakota16015622743
North Dakota173401215586
Wyoming191282369140
Vermont206382675377
Maine224373561196
New Hampshire2815297570
Idaho341473410173
Alaska497324505461
Delaware519724993122
above from National Center for Education Statistics
http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2001/overview/table05.asp
Here is an overview of their tables
http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2001/overview/tables.asp
and their site map Here is a LOT of information.
http://nces.ed.gov/help/sitemap.asp



Expenditures Per Pupil in Average Daily Attendance 2001-2002
$11,103    Alaska
$10,166    Delaware
$  9,764    Vermont
$  9,148    Maine
$  8,418    Wyoming
$  7,855    New Hampshire
$  7,316    Montana
$  6,421    South Dakota
$  6,341    Idaho
$  4,363    North Dakota
NEA Estimate:  Data Source: NEA Estimates Data Base as of 05/16/2002 from
http://www.teateachers.org/membercenter/per-pupil-expenditures.php
(the above site has lots of other data aimed at teachers - salaries, etc.)


Percentages of population with High School Diplomas or Bachelors Degrees
Part of what makes a republic possible and a community life enjoyable is an intelligent, educated populace and electorate. Even if they disagree with you, at least they may have the intelligence and education to tell you why. The hardest thing for a liberty-minded movement to do is to educate the electorate about what is going on and how to make it better. On the other hand, graduates of the American colleges may be socialists. Yet the media's most likely sheep are those who don't have the intelligence to get a Bachelors (which is equivalent today to what a H.S. diploma used to be). Nevertheless, there are bright people without a Bachelor's - perhaps too bright to go through that B.S.

2000 census data -- percent of 25 or older with Bachelors Degree or higher
29.4%  Vermont
28.7%  New Hampshire
25.0%  Delaware
24.7%  Alaska
24.4%  Montana
22.9%  Maine
22.0%  North Dakota
21.9%  Wyoming
21.7%  Idaho
21.5%  South Dakota
Source:
QT-P20. Educational Attainment by Sex:  2000
Data Set: Census 2000 Summary File 3 (SF 3) - Sample Data

1990 census data -- percent of 18 or older who are High School Graduates
(incl. equiv.) or "better" (with college).
85.77%  Alaska
82.61%  Wyoming
81.88%  New Hampshire
81.11%  Vermont
80.67%  Montana
79.34%  Idaho
78.97%  Maine
78.05%  Delaware
77.95%  North Dakota
77.67%  South Dakota

2002 Percent of population with less than a high school diploma (H.S.D.) or equivalent followed by Projected % change in number of high school graduates 1999-2010.
  8.2 %    South Dakota  -9.0%  (best percentage of H.S.D. but decreasing grads)
  9.6 %    Alaska  -1.9%
10.0 %    Vermont   0.0%
10.0 %    Wyoming  -20.9%
10.4 %    Montana  -6.0%
10.7 %    Maine  -7.9%
11.9 %    New Hampshire   3.2%
13.8 %    Idaho  10.7%
13.9 %    Delaware   5.4%
14.5 %    North Dakota  -22.4%  (worst percentage of H.S.D. and decreasing grads)
Source:
http://measuringup.highereducation.org/2002/state_addcomparison.cfm
The above site enables direct comparisons of selected states on many measures. You can select our ten states and what measures you wish to compare. Wowser!  Check it out!


Strength of the Teachers' Unions
A measure of the strength of the National Education Association which the Free State activists will be going up against in any effort to privatize schools, change the curriculae, cut back the tax funding for public schools, or any other move that the school establishment would view as a challenge to their monopoly power. The following refers only to NEA numbers.  Note that AFT "votes" are full time equivalents and thus the "voters" which could be allied against us may be many, many more -- nearly every part timer and substitute teacher.
http://home.earthlink.net/~mantonucci/archives/20020716.htm
http://www.aft.org/

Total teacher numbers is also a crucial factor for the FSP - just like total voter numbers. In Idaho, Maine, New Hampshire, and Montana the teachers would outnumber the 20,000 Free State activists.  Just the 18,288 NEA membership in Maine would give 20,000 Free State activists a run for their money. When AFT numbers are added to the NEA membership, Alaska (13,560+) and Montana (14,194) teachers could give the Free State activists a hard fight. Teachers, especially union teachers, are activists - if for no other reason than they daily reach a large number of students and their parents. Remember too that the schools also swing a huge number of votes when spouses and parents are added to the weight the teachers, administrators and staff have. Yet their unending demands for more money can be defeated as we did three times in a row in our community (Leadville/Lake County in Colorado).

Note that the first category is the “best” from an anti-union monoploy standpoint.
The last category is the “worst”. How else to interpret these numbers is up to you.
Source:
http://www.nilrr.org/MonsterMonopoly.htm

Percent of K-12 employees in the NEA (2000 membership vs total employees)
(states with less than 1,000 AFT "votes" were omitted from the source for AFT numbers)

States That Do Not Authorize Teacher-Monopoly Bargaining or Forced-Dues      
38.30%   Wyoming (5,713 of 14,930)
       
States With Teacher Monopoly Bargaining, But No Forced Dues For Teachers      
36.10%   South Dakota (6,524 of 18,053)
37.60%   Idaho (11,132 of 29,613)
51.10%   Vermont (8,974 of 17,559)
51.70%   North Dakota (7,282 of 14,074) + 1,665 in AFT for total 63.6%
53.30%   Maine (18,288 of 34,301)
       
States That Authorize Teacher Monopoly Bargaining and Forced Dues      
40.80%   New Hampshire (11,834 of 28,974)
49.50%   Montana (10,621 of 21,477) + 3,573 in AFT for total 63.6%
53.90%   Alaska (9,892 of 18,342) + 3,668 in AFT for total 53.9%
60.40%   Delaware (9,239 of 15,290)

P.S.
Feel free to add more data in more posts.
« Last Edit: January 02, 2003, 12:59:35 am by Joe »
Logged

Raider

  • FSP Participant
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8
  • Why are you taking my money?
Re:Ranking states by "best" schools, spending, etc.
« Reply #1 on: January 01, 2003, 04:58:40 pm »

This is good information.  My wife (Thewaka) will be home schooling our children.  If I understand this, we want to stay away from states that already spend a considerable amount of monies on "State Education" and any state with forced teacher association dues.  
Logged

Zxcv

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1229
Re:Ranking states by "best" schools, spending, etc.
« Reply #2 on: January 01, 2003, 06:49:39 pm »

Joe, this (especially the union stuff) is one of the most important criteria we will have, in my opinion - right up there with voting population. These folks will be our opponents.

They are also the reason government seems to grow without end. Once you get a critical mass of government employees, they have the luxury of hiring lobbyists (with OUR tax dollars) to push for more and more positions and more tax dollars. These numbers are of crucial importance.

One point to consider is the political culture of the teachers themselves. The low percentage of union members in Wyoming, South Dakota and Idaho, especially along with no forced dues (a huge factor - we had an initative to end the practice defeated in Oregon) are big indicators that unions generally are not welcome in these states, and that even teachers are more inclined to deal with employers as individuals than collectively. This means they are very much less likely to jump on to other statist bandwagons, unlike teachers in some states. It also means that moving legislation such as elimination of homeschool regulations, and education tax credits, are probably going to see easier sailing in these states. I think the disparity in favor of these three states, due to the cultural difference, is even larger than the raw numbers indicate.

The only problem with this is that some things cut two ways. For example, North Dakota is first in the nation in the "camelot" index (funny they are lowest in per-pupil spending - that's saying something, isn't it?) This implies that people will be content with the schools. Good for the kids in a way, but it also means folk will be less likely be dissatisfied, and to bail out of the schools. (BTW it would be nice to see the 50-state ranking on some of these tables like the Camelot index - the actual index numbers are kind of meaningless for us).

I'm happy my 3 favorite states, Wyoming, Idaho and South Dakota did so well on a percentage rating for the union numbers. On a numerical basis, it looks like Wyoming is again on top, followed by South Dakota and North Dakota. I'd really rather the FSP were fighting fewer than 8000 union members, and I'd rather the union members were the probably more independent-minded western ones.

I think we can almost eliminate Maine from consideration based on this one item, 18,000 union members, plus the high voting population.

Excellent work Joe, just great!
Logged

Solitar

  • Guest
Re:Ranking states by "best" schools, spending, etc.
« Reply #3 on: January 01, 2003, 07:27:44 pm »

Zxcv,
For the rankings of all 50 states check the link for Tennessee's Camelot Index. Here it is again. Note their note regarding South Dakota. I think that just a little bit of attention to education rather than all the other BS could raise some states a lot. Here is that link again (you can get to the other indexes from the bottom of the page)
http://www.wnpt.net/tndollars/compare_ed.htm
http://www.wnpt.net/tndollars/camelot_start.htm

The  percentages of grads in some states, like the Dakota's is hurt because they've lost their best people out of state over the last several years or decades. But, like Vermont, the kids can come home with their kids if the Free State movement can turn the economy and political environment around. Thus those percentages could change quite quickly -- 20,000 FSP'ers could add likely nearly 20,000 Bachelor's recipients within a few years.

For the western states it is the Indian reservations and the overflow into neighboring counties which is a real challenge. Those folks and the whites who've been pulled into that Federal morass affect the state's overall numbers. Yet the Dakotas do amazing things with the little money they do have.
Logged

faraway

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 26
  • I'm a llama!
Re:Ranking states by "best" schools, spending, etc.
« Reply #4 on: January 02, 2003, 01:37:50 am »

Ah me, education.  The NEA's a problem, mainly because generally, in order to be in it, the expectation is that you're with it.
And it's silly agendas.  As has been noted, North Dakota does quite well with the schools, but in part that's due to the
unfortunate fact that the place is literally running out of kids.  So they do try to keep who they have.  However, ND is having to consolidate schools because many towns can no longer support having a school of it's own.  And that trend has extended into regional consolidations.
And, I can understand the hostility to the NEA. Those idiots and the system they've doctored, have virtually trashed elementary/secondary education.  And, true, in Montana/ ND/SD/etc... some of the PS crowd, do opt out of the NEA.  The problem (in Montana anyway) is that the relative pay for any manner of teaching...tends to be
an economic  travesty.  So a vex... no NEA bingo pay for a proportion of declared/defined idiots...brings on the other dilemma that, due to the monetary issues...some of the better people in teaching, won't come to these states, or if they do...they cannot stay.  
So unless an FSP can figure out a means to bypass that problem, getting the better teachers to come to an FSP here in the Northern plains, could be problematic.  Essentially, then how would a FSP make an appeal to the people who would be useful teachers?.
Forbearance/evasion/etc of student loans could be arranged.  That would be appealing to many simply because the cost of the education, to educate has spiraled out of reason.  And those costs are a problem for both academics and the PS crowd.  But, using that solution, implies some very deep compromises to an FSP agenda.  
Other possibilities might include some manner of tax/fee exemptions etc.  Still a compromise of FSP agenda's.  College paid for as part of a corporate deal to be exempt from other taxes?  A bit selective, and could be viewed as a special interest deal.
Well then, how to recruit/retain the better teachers?.  One possibility would be to break the collar that state teachers cert. programs have on PS licenses.  Might bring a few good people in, as the additional costs of a year or two of those courses, could be dropped.  And it wouldn't substantially hurt the quality of education.  
Might help actually, as then the contigent who have specialist bach/grad degrees-wouldn't get chased out by the threat of more schooling that many view as pointless.  And ironically, these people, are the exact ones, who the current NEA supported system, do chase away.  
Still the problem is monetary.  As others have noted, throwing money at the PS isn't a solution.  That hasn't worked, and won't work.  However, it must be noted that many of those funds, do tend to migrate elsewhere besides the classroom.  The administrative overhead (not to mention the 70,000$ team bus- a particularity which seems to breed here on the plains), tends to negate increased funding.
And this problem is epidemic in academia also.  But a lots of vexations here to puzzle through.  Montana for example, is currently in the process of what amounts to as a teachers revolt over pay.  Several of the larger cities have had strikes etc.  Granted it is NEA organized, with what that indicates.  However, a substantial portion of teachers (be it PS or college)
are reluctant to abandon their class people...and the fact that they were willing to go along with a revolt of that type, means economic troubles were too deep for them.  A hard decision to make.   And a harder problem for an FSP to resolve if it is to avoid some of the problems that currently afflict Montana.
So within a FSP framework, how are teachers to be recruited, trained, and paid enough so that they don't leave the field?
And the free market, would only provide a limited alternative. Private schools, and semi-privates (such as charters, vouchers etc), cannot cover the whole demand.  And apologies Joe, I know I didn't add any rankings or statistics.  But, many of those that I could add, are alas, confidental to the place wherein I am exiled.


« Last Edit: January 02, 2003, 01:59:17 am by faraway »
Logged
atana potinaja

varrin

  • Former FSP President
  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 999
  • THE air male
    • Varrin's FSP Info Page
Re:Ranking states by "best" schools, spending, etc.
« Reply #5 on: January 02, 2003, 11:09:41 am »

I think we should go to Deleware, sell the public school system to the NEA, and end the tax funding and government regulation of it.  Then we'll see if they're really the experts ;-)

V-

Logged
Departed Fresno, PRC (Peoples Republic of California): October 18, 2004
Arrived Keene, FS (Free State!): October 25, 2004!
To contact me, please use email, not PM here.

Zxcv

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1229
Re:Ranking states by "best" schools, spending, etc.
« Reply #6 on: January 02, 2003, 12:02:25 pm »

faraway, what makes you think the free market can't handle it?

Studies I have seen of government school teacher pay shows it being half again as much as what private school teachers make. The real "economic travesty" is that taxpayers are forced to pay it! These government schools are also loaded with non-teaching personnel, sometimes 50% of the folks. A complete scam; parochial schools make do with far, far less.

Teachers need more freedom to teach what the market wants, not what some bureaucrat above tells them to teach. They also need to become personally responsible, and work in the private market just like the rest of us. If they are competent, they don't need to fear educational freedom; instead they should embrace it.

The FSP should work to reduce and finally eliminate citizens' dependence on government schools, by whatever means it has available. We don't need to recruit teachers, or any of that nonsense.

I suggest you read John Taylor Gatto's The Underground History of American Education if you haven't already. Go look on www.johntaylorgatto.com for the first 8 chapters.

Here are the sorts of things we should do in our state.

1) Eliminate compulsion in schooling.

2) Allow an education tax credit for anyone who refrains from sending his kid into the government school (I mean a real tax credit, not a subsidy - some folks have taken to calling subsidies "tax credits"). This tax credit should only be done if no strings whatever are attached to it; I'm not looking to bring more government control of parents in.

3) Eliminate all homeschooling regulations and oversight.

4) Eliminate any regulations on private schools.

5) Eliminate any credentialling requirements.

6) Simply start praising people who do not use government schools, for being good parents and for saving taxpayers a lot of money. Start calling government schools what they are, wefare and socialism. Also make people aware of the history of government schools.

7) Fight any and all government school funding increases. Instead, use all opportunities to reduce taxes.

8) Eliminate any government programs out there to "help" homeschoolers.

9) Create a program by which the people of any school cachment area are able to vote to take their government school private. If this happens simply hand the keys of the building over to a committee of the parents, and tell them they are on their own, no more tax funding.

10) Eliminate drugs use (Ritalin, etc.) in schools.

11) Move as much of government school costs off of funding via broad-based taxes, and into a user fee arrangement.

12) Stop granting any more charters, if that has started in our state, and certainly do not bring in vouchers. Vouchers must be fought at all costs.

These are just some examples. Some might take a while to accomplish, while others such as elimination of homeschool regulations should be started on immediately.
Logged

varrin

  • Former FSP President
  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 999
  • THE air male
    • Varrin's FSP Info Page
Re:Ranking states by "best" schools, spending, etc.
« Reply #7 on: January 02, 2003, 02:51:04 pm »

Zxcv,

I'm impressed.  That's a good list.  Gatto is on the right track too - good recommendation.

I would propose #2 only as a temporary measure until we can get across the board tax reductions accomplished.  Also, we can be doing #6 right now.  I make a point of encouraging homeschoolers (the parents *and* the kids).

One thing we'll need to do is start one or more private scholorship funds for K-12 schooling (if people even care to use the K-12 format, that is ;-)  Getting that sort of thing going right away (and making sure it's got some money in it) would be a significant help.  Here's a neat trick too: make it a non-profit (scholorships should be) and that way parents can contribute to their own kids' scholorship fund and pay for their private schooling on a *federal-tax-free* basis.  Wheeeeeeee.

V-

Logged
Departed Fresno, PRC (Peoples Republic of California): October 18, 2004
Arrived Keene, FS (Free State!): October 25, 2004!
To contact me, please use email, not PM here.

Zxcv

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1229
Re:Ranking states by "best" schools, spending, etc.
« Reply #8 on: January 02, 2003, 06:39:35 pm »

Well, tax credits should stay in place for as long as parents are forced to fund schools they don't use.

As to the scholarship fund, such already exists, and is extremely successful despite the competition from "free" government schools:

http://www.cascadepolicy.org/csffaq.asp

We need to bring this to our state and push it hard, and contribute to it, too.
Logged

faraway

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 26
  • I'm a llama!
Re:Ranking states by "best" schools, spending, etc.
« Reply #9 on: January 03, 2003, 10:34:57 pm »

The reason the free market cannot handle it is due to costs and location concerns.  In isolated areas, without aid from other
entities (be these government, churches, etc), there often isn't enough of a student base to make a commercial school viable on
any sustained basis.  It isn't possible to charge enough tuition, or get enough students to sustain the operating costs of a school.  And in some of the states, under FSP consideration, large parts of the state(s) are just these kind of areas.
That's why in many rural areas (KS, Montana etc), many of the private schools are under the sponsorship of the churches.  And as such, these are not quite 'free market'.
Simply because, the churches do get some additional benefits from the government, be it tax exemptions, or the proposed voucher plans.
As far as private school teachers making more, generally true. However, the privates tend to hire vagente University/ college people or those who have specialist degrees.
That, from my personal opinion is wonderful.  But from a pragmatic view, there aren't enough of those kind of people to run large scale schools.  Many of them either migrate around in academia,
or go into private business.  And most sensible ones, will very clearly not, go to some of the states FSP has mentioned.  Free market...they can make much more elsewhere, and it's not to their long term advantage to stay in Wyoming, Montana, ND, SD etc.
That's why, from a free market sense, colleges in these places oftimes need to scramble for staff.  So the expectation that the academic pool from which sundry academies draw, can supply a large scale system, isn't viable.
Also, as irritating as the public school system is, it's not going to go away by dictate.  It's been in entrenched existance since the era of John Dewey, and isn't going to disappear in a puff of vapor.  Nor is legislation, even in a FSP likely to achieve that end.  
The best alternative, is to redirect the already existing system.  And at this time the most successful attempts in that arena, have been the charters.  And even that movement, has been resisted.  But the charter movement does have an already existing national lobby,
local bases, and proof it can work.  And like it or not, the charters are a type of public school, albeit a form which works and provides a wider range of alternatives. But these are funded by the commonwealth.  And yes, an FSP does need to recruit and convince teachers.  First, the FSP agenda is new, and some of it's statements could be a bit hard to digest for some currently within or headed into  the education system.
And until a new core can be taught, those people will be needed to run the schools. So an educational agenda, which pushes too hard, too fast...will soon find itself without staff.  Not a lot of incentive to retain them.   But until replacements are in line, a bad idea to alienate the old line.   Second, as noted already, in many areas, private schools as strictly defined cannot operate on a long term basis.  So, if an FSP expects people to teach in their schools, some means of operating these schools will be required.  Most sensible teachers won't pull up stakes,
and relocate based on the assumption that the school system, may or may not be running when they get there...even if they might be sympathetic to an FSP.   Also, excepting specialist private schools and academia, much of the knowledge that the PS crowd needs, translates very poorly to the 'free market'.   So, agenda statements that the 'free market' can answer all an FSP's educational needs, will virtually ensure a loss of needed staff.
Simply due to decisions by the K-6 crowd, to avoid the place.  (And like it or not, much of the skills and knowledge useable for a k-6, are not quite free marketable... Unfortunately, the knowledge and skills needed to teach and manage a pack of emotion/hormone crazed elementary/middle schoolers...doesn't always translate well at K-Mart, MBE etc)
So essentially, and alas, the free market is not going to provide the entirety of an FSP school system.   An FSP at best, could expect to redirect existing systems, simple abandonment would likely result in educational chaos. Or the political crucifixion of an FSP entity.  And as already discussed on another of these postings, an FSP which entirely abrogates education for the common, could be isolating substantial numbers of it's kids into a educational void.  And as wonderful as private schools and homeschooling are, these aren't suited to operations over an entire state.
The real advantage a 'free market' would have in a FSP paradigm...would be if an FSP could break the hold the teachers colleges have on who can teach in the existing schools.  And that alone, could be quite a fight.  Which could be quickly lost by blanket statements about gutting the entire system.  
« Last Edit: January 03, 2003, 10:50:23 pm by faraway »
Logged
atana potinaja

Zxcv

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1229
Re:Ranking states by "best" schools, spending, etc.
« Reply #10 on: January 04, 2003, 01:22:33 am »

I'm sorry, faraway, your prescription simply won't fly with the FSP - or if it does, the FSP is not for me!

First, there are two scenarios here:
1) Whether the FSP should dump the govt. schools wholesale and immediately, or advocate that;

2) Whether the FSP should enhance the alternatives, and let the government schools rot on the vine of their own accord as they inevitably will do, but make no direct attack on the system.

When you write the following:
Quote
An FSP at best, could expect to redirect existing systems, simple abandonment would likely result in educational chaos. Or the political crucifixion of an FSP entity.  
...it makes me appear to be advocating #1 above. Please don't do that. Go re-read my earlier post, and my proposals in it; it is clearly advocating #2 above. I  agree that #1 is not in any way feasible, and would be the end of the FSP.

On the other hand, I must completely disagree with your implication, if I understand you correctly, that education can never be served entirely by the free market:
Quote
And as already discussed on another of these postings, an FSP which entirely abrogates education for the common, could be isolating substantial numbers of it's kids into a educational void.  And as wonderful as private schools and homeschooling are, these aren't suited to operations over an entire state.
This is simply in error, historically disproven. Please refer to the Gatto work I noted above, or look at Andrew Coulson's Market Education. This notion, that the market cannot handle the job, has no hope of flying within the FSP.

Again, vouchers and charter schools are just another pair of government programs. They will add to the misery over the long term, and I will do everything I can to keep them out of the FSP agenda. And any other way of working "within the system". The system has been going through reforms ever since Horace Mann brought this abomination to this country from socialist, militarist Prussia 150 years ago, and with every one it has gotten worse. It is already dead, but just doesn't know it yet.

Quote
In isolated areas, without aid from other
entities (be these government, churches, etc), there often isn't enough of a student base to make a commercial school viable on any sustained basis.

Again, historically disproven. The entire US (the most literate nation in the early 19th century) was much like our candidate states now in terms of isolation, etc.

Quote
That's why in many rural areas (KS, Montana etc), many of the private schools are under the sponsorship of the churches.  And as such, these are not quite 'free market'.
Simply because, the churches do get some additional benefits from the government, be it tax exemptions, or the proposed voucher plans.
But churches (and other voluntary organizations) are free market. Just because the government refrains from taxing them, that does not mean government is subsidizing them! That is a similar notion to that which left-liberals push, when they say governments "can't afford" tax cuts! A pretty statist way of looking at things. As to the voucher, I agree with you, but that is why I oppose them so. I don't want to see churches become another arm of the federal or state governments.

faraway, I can see where you are coming from. At least it appears that you are a govt. school teacher. Your worldview is shaped by that environment. But believe me, the FSP is not going to try to "fix" government schools. We will do everything we can to get kids out of them.
Logged

Robert H.

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1361
  • Jeffersonian
    • Devolution USA
Re:Ranking states by "best" schools, spending, etc.
« Reply #11 on: January 04, 2003, 05:35:53 am »

But believe me, the FSP is not going to try to "fix" government schools. We will do everything we can to get kids out of them.

Setting up FSP member sponsored private schools could really go the distance for us in terms of dealing with public education.  Many of us will homeschool of course, but others will probably need or prefer to have their kids attend private schools.  Once these schools are in operation, they can demonstrate a superior approach and product that will seriously call the public school system into question without us ever having to tackle the issue.  Then, at some point along the line, we can press the issue by lobbying for the right to get our education tax dollars returned to us.

The less populous the state the better here as well because our numbers will then represent an unprecedented percentage of a state's residents who are operating outside of the public school system.  And the larger that percentage as compared to the state's total population the better.  This combined with our being able to demonstrate the superior results of private education, and lobbying to have our education tax dollars returned to us, will turn up the heat on the system without our having to directly attack it.

Solitar

  • Guest
Re:Ranking states by "best" schools, spending, etc.
« Reply #12 on: January 04, 2003, 06:07:33 am »

Zxcv, and others here.
When Faraway was here in this town and before he was driven to accept a job teaching on an Indian Reservation, he and I and another well-traveled and wise compatriot shared many discussions. Faraway has the experience in teaching, law enforcement, and other sundry occupations to really know, deep-down-know, the difficulties and realities of what we face. Please seriously consider his statements and arguments since he really is one of us in spite of it all.  He has lived and worked and is living and working in the midst of several of those states the FSP is considering (SD, ND, MT). He knows them all too well and we should solicit and seriously weigh his experience there. Reality is sobering and terribly depressing at times.

One of Faraway's best suggestions for the FSP is:
Quote
One possibility would be to break the collar that state teachers cert. programs have on PS [Public School]  licenses.  Might bring a few good people in, as the additional costs of a year or two of those courses, could be dropped.  And it wouldn't substantially hurt the quality of education.
Might help actually, as then the contigent who have specialist bach/grad degrees-wouldn't get chased out by the threat of more schooling that many view as pointless.  And ironically, these people, are the exact ones, who the current NEA supported system, do chase away.  

Zxcv,
When you insist on a free market solution, please bear in mind that in some very depressed and hope-deprived areas there is not enough economy to provide a free market solution. It's a class Catch-22.  There is not either enough funds to do the job or hope and ambition on the part of the students and parents to try -- because they've little hope that an education would gain much anyway in their poor towns. Look at the demographics of eastern Montana and much of the Dakotas. The rural areas are hemoraghing their best and brightest and even their middle to modicum to the cities of those states and to out of state. Those left behind are those with little hope and less ability to do anything about it. Faraway does have a serious and real problem to place in front of the Free State -- just how to solve the education and economic woes of those depressed areas. As you ask him to re-read your material, please re-read especially his second post. Yes, he may be too close to the problem to see some solutions, but he is also far closer to the problem than many here may ever hope (or fear) to get.

As with many of the LP's academic philosophic discussions about solutions, the FSP sometimes loses sight of the realities faced by those in the trenches. Please listen to what Faraway writes of and try to work out a solution for his benighted students and the communities thereof. After all, if the FSP chooses one of the northern plains states it will have to face those hard realities and Faraway's experience and assistance will be invaluable. He really is one of us, in spite of it all.

Where to start?
For areas which still have some basic ability left to pull themselves up by their bootstraps  Zxcv's list consists of great solutions! The Free Staters should implement all of them as quickly as politically possible. Nevertheless, #2 on that list shares a disadvantage of other "tax credit" programs -- unless one actually gets the credit back in cash like a "Earned Income Credit", a tax credit doesn't help those of us who don't make enough to pay taxes.

Yes, it would be best if people who made less than $7,000 per year didn't have kids but I see no way to stop them short of halting all the safety nets and convincing them to have kids in New York or California instead (I remember the time forty to fifty years ago when welfare families move to NY because NY paid the pest).

Leaving the free market the freedom to redline entire areas and just not serve some populations will enable the liberal media, politicians, teachers unions, etc. to scourge the Free State for heartlessly abandoning "the children" which then become criminals which fill the Free State jails (private jails? - paid for by home if the inmates can't pay? work parties?)  All in all a very difficult nut to crack and prepare (some nuts are poisonous unless prepared correctly).
« Last Edit: January 04, 2003, 11:22:26 am by Joe »
Logged

JasonPSorens

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5706
  • Neohantonum liberissimum erit.
    • My Homepage
Re:Ranking states by "best" schools, spending, etc.
« Reply #13 on: January 04, 2003, 11:11:27 am »

Is he one of us?  Without a doubt, eventual complete privatization of schooling is a major part of our future program.  Someone who can't agree on this does not belong here.
Logged
"Educate your children, educate yourselves, in the love for the freedom of others, for only in this way will your own freedom not be a gratuitous gift from fate. You will be aware of its worth and will have the courage to defend it." --Joaquim Nabuco (1883), Abolitionism

Zxcv

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1229
Re:Ranking states by "best" schools, spending, etc.
« Reply #14 on: January 04, 2003, 12:33:45 pm »

Joe, I am always going to defer to you when it comes to experience with local government. But I am going to ask you to trust me somewhat on the education front.

While not a teacher, I have been reading on the subject for many years (serious authors like Gatto, Holt, Coulsen, Alfie Kohn, Lewis Perlman). I have years of frequent contribution to our local 500-member homeschool discussion list, and am a regular contributor to the Separation of School & State discussion list. (www.sepschool.org).

Over long discussions on that list on the subject, we generally came to the conclusion that there is no feasible legislative strategy to attain "Separation". That is, in the direct sense. Yes, the attractiveness of alternatives can always be improved as I've suggested above, but the system itself will not come to an end in the legislature. The only way it will end, is when individual parents remove their children from government schools. That is already happening, and at an accellerating rate.

There certainly is a transition problem, but that problem will be there even if we try to "work within the system", because the system will come to an end, no matter what we do with it, whether or not there is a Separation movement. It is its own worst enemy. The question is not whether or not children will be harmed in this transition, it is how we can minimize the numbers damaged. And that will not be done by prolonging the agony, staying within the system.

Quote
Leaving the free market the freedom to redline entire areas and just not serve some populations will enable the liberal media, politicians, teachers unions, etc. to scourge the Free State for heartlessly abandoning "the children" which then become criminals which fill the Free State jails (private jails? - paid for by home if the inmates can't pay? work parties?)

These folks are going to scourge us no matter what. Can't help that. (And I don't mind if we get this kind of reputation externally - what better way to keep statists out?) But are you suggesting what they say is true? The old "spend you money on schools, or spend it on jails" either-or fallacy? That's nonsense. As one poster on the Separation list put it, "Schools attempt to take credit for what occurs naturally, and blame others for the negative consequences of institutionalization." Schools don't keep people from jail; they are one of the main reasons people end up in jail.

Besides, it will be hard to argue that we are abandoning people to a life of crime, when our crime rate will be dropping faster than any other state's!

Quote
Nevertheless, #2 on that list shares a disadvantage of other "tax credit" programs -- unless one actually gets the credit back in cash like a "Earned Income Credit", a tax credit doesn't help those of us who don't make enough to pay taxes.

No, an "earned income credit" is not really a credit (more statist corruption of the language), it is a subsidy. Sorry, last I checked, it is wrong to take money out of one person's pocket, to give to another.

You are falling for the old "what about the poor" argument. Go look at http://www.fee.org/vnews.php?nid=221 for an answer to that. Of course it takes very little money to educate children; homeschoolers spend an average of $500 a year to do it (which means of course, some manage with $200 or $300).

I am not saying poor people shouldn't have kids; it's not necessary for them to stop doing that. They just have to take responsibility for them; fortunately, that is not an expensive proposition. Anyway, 90% of the people who use government schools are not poor. If you want to argue for making govt. schooling a means-tested welfare program, then argue that (not that I'd agree, since it is just like any other welfare program which we intend to discourage, but that would at least make a little more sense than that everyone should receive welfare).

Quote
The rural areas are hemoraghing their best and brightest and even their middle to modicum to the cities of those states and to out of state. Those left behind are those with little hope and less ability to do anything about it.

If there is any single cause for kids to have "little hope and less ability", it is the schools themselves. The people most harmed by the schools are these people. Get them out of these schools and they will have hope and ability.

faraway is simply wrong on this, except for the credentialing which I already agreed with. Neither vouchers nor charters are the answer, and we must fight them as much as possible.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up