Louisiana privatizes education

[Keronians]

It shouldn't be completely privatised.

It should be a hybrid system. Those generally involve a single payer system (i.e. monopsonic).

Arguments for or against private education aside, I fail to see how a universal curriculum provides either educational service efficiency.

viewtopic.php?p=8693849#p8693849

The above is my own proposal.

Anyway, a universal curriculum should be viewed as a "core". It can easily be supplemented (and should be designed so as to leave sufficient time to allow for such flexibility) by activities / lessons up to the school.

[Ethel mermania]

I agree with you about the prisons, I would also throw in the whole justice system, sanitation, enviormental protection, and defense.
I don't think education is best served by one model.

It might not be, but education must first and foremost be available universally. Concentrating good students into certain schools isn't going to make the problem of bad students go away, it will concentrate that as well. Schools that don't have to take everyone will naturally do better than schools that have to try and provide anyone with an education that shows up. As such an overly privatized model will simply not work.

Universal education, does not require only public schools. Here charther selection is application and then lottery, if to many seats are applied for. The school does not get to cherry pick its students.

[The Black Forrest]

It might not be, but education must first and foremost be available universally. Concentrating good students into certain schools isn't going to make the problem of bad students go away, it will concentrate that as well. Schools that don't have to take everyone will naturally do better than schools that have to try and provide anyone with an education that shows up. As such an overly privatized model will simply not work.

Universal education, does not require only public schools. Here charther selection is application and then lottery, if to many seats are applied for. The school does not get to cherry pick its students.

And who will police that?

If they cherry pick and have outstanding performance, they can charge more.

[Ethel mermania]

A few of the charters, even after the scores were adjusted, the charters slightly outperformed the city schools.

....didn't I just say that?

No, no you did not. You implied rough equivalence, the numbers say slightly (but statisticlly significant) better.

[The Black Forrest]

....didn't I just say that?

No, no you did not. You implied rough equivalence, the numbers say slightly (but statisticlly significant) better.

Of course they are going to be better. Are the charter schools dealing with the all the kids with issues which the public system has?

Also her message; came across.....

[Laissez-Faire]

Arguments for or against private education aside, I fail to see how a universal curriculum provides either educational service efficiency.

viewtopic.php?p=8693849#p8693849

The above is my own proposal.

Anyway, a universal curriculum should be viewed as a "core". It can easily be supplemented (and should be designed so as to leave sufficient time to allow for such flexibility) by activities / lessons up to the school.

Not a bad system, however government inefficiencies won't make it the medium for distributing educational resources. Education is a public interest, and having a market of curriculum can aid in direct school-to-school competition. Why not have a host of schools and allow them to be run privately and make decisions on the most efficient curriculum, and have a wide variety of companies make standardized tests to meet needs for the assessement of students individually?

It seems like a national system still maintains 'winnner take all' with regards to certain areas. It's not the way free market competition works best. Results might be the same, i.e. a fairly standard system, however, the responsibility of the 'best system' is left to stakeholders in a more dynamic fashion.

[Ethel mermania]

Universal education, does not require only public schools. Here charther selection is application and then lottery, if to many seats are applied for. The school does not get to cherry pick its students.

And who will police that?

If they cherry pick and have outstanding performance, they can charge more.

State board of education policies, and the schools CAN NOT, cherry pick its students.

[Sagatagan]

The role of private education in the South has traditionally been to circumvent integration by sending the wealthier white kids to private schools.

[Raeyh]

And who will police that?

If they cherry pick and have outstanding performance, they can charge more.

State board of education policies, and the schools CAN NOT, cherry pick its students.

They can by expelling "trouble" students who don't perform well enough.

[The Black Forrest]

viewtopic.php?p=8693849#p8693849

The above is my own proposal.

Anyway, a universal curriculum should be viewed as a "core". It can easily be supplemented (and should be designed so as to leave sufficient time to allow for such flexibility) by activities / lessons up to the school.

Not a bad system, however government inefficiencies won't make it the medium for distributing educational resources. Education is a public interest, and having a market of curriculum can aid in direct school-to-school competition. Why not have a host of schools and allow them to be run privately and make decisions on the most efficient curriculum, and have a wide variety of companies make standardized tests to meet needs for the assessement of students individually?

It seems like a national system still maintains 'winnner take all' with regards to certain areas. It's not the way free market competition works best. Results might be the same, i.e. a fairly standard system, however, the responsibility of the 'best system' is left to stakeholders in a more dynamic fashion.

That works for a company; it fails you look for a job.

A kids education is not that simple.

[Trollgaard]

What an absolutely terrible idea.

Man, I'm really getting fed up with bullshit like this. Is like some sections of government want people to fail, and eventually the country to fail.

[Ethel mermania]

No, no you did not. You implied rough equivalence, the numbers say slightly (but statisticlly significant) better.

Of course they are going to be better. Are the charter schools dealing with the all the kids with issues which the public system has?

Also her message; came across.....

So you want to stop schools that "of course they are going to be better"?

And on that note" I gotta go back to real life. Enjoyed the debate, thanks.

[The Black Forrest]

And who will police that?

If they cherry pick and have outstanding performance, they can charge more.

State board of education policies, and the schools CAN NOT, cherry pick its students.

So the schools will remain government run?

[Wamitoria]

And who will police that?

If they cherry pick and have outstanding performance, they can charge more.

State board of education policies, and the schools CAN NOT, cherry pick its students.

But you know they will.

[The Black Forrest]

Of course they are going to be better. Are the charter schools dealing with the all the kids with issues which the public system has?

Also her message; came across.....

So you want to stop schools that "of course they are going to be better"?

And on that note" I gotta go back to real life. Enjoyed the debate, thanks.

No. The point is the body of students are not the same. The question remains if the charters are dealing with the problem students like the public schools.

[Laissez-Faire]

Not a bad system, however government inefficiencies won't make it the medium for distributing educational resources. Education is a public interest, and having a market of curriculum can aid in direct school-to-school competition. Why not have a host of schools and allow them to be run privately and make decisions on the most efficient curriculum, and have a wide variety of companies make standardized tests to meet needs for the assessement of students individually?

It seems like a national system still maintains 'winnner take all' with regards to certain areas. It's not the way free market competition works best. Results might be the same, i.e. a fairly standard system, however, the responsibility of the 'best system' is left to stakeholders in a more dynamic fashion.

That works for a company; it fails you look for a job.

A kids education is not that simple.

And what is to say that the market would fail exceptionally, or moreso than government? The market has adapted to service vital needs, and it hasn't left a trail of despair behind.

Plus, actual education isn't really the most core aspect to a child's development. It's much more of an individual matter. Making students a static player in education has never helped.

[Laissez-Faire]

So you want to stop schools that "of course they are going to be better"?

And on that note" I gotta go back to real life. Enjoyed the debate, thanks.

No. The point is the body of students are not the same. The question remains if the charters are dealing with the problem students like the public schools.

There is demand to do so, is there not? I don't fundamentally see why charter schools would have an interest in regarding all students similarly.

[Chestaan]

States should be providing MORE public education, not less.

[Wamitoria]

No. The point is the body of students are not the same. The question remains if the charters are dealing with the problem students like the public schools.

There is demand to do so, is there not? I don't fundamentally see why charter schools would have an interest in regarding all students similarly.

Because it's cheaper to mass produce curriculum then to spend the money on fixing what's actually broken with the system.

[Laissez-Faire]

There is demand to do so, is there not? I don't fundamentally see why charter schools would have an interest in regarding all students similarly.

Because it's cheaper to mass produce curriculum then to spend the money on fixing what's actually broken with the system.

It's cheaper to just not provide comprehensive healthcare. That has not stopped private healthcare insurers.

You are forgetting that there is signifigant demand, and that plays a role in what companies provide.

They have to sell something to make a profit, and quality will enhance a market base.

[Wamitoria]

Because it's cheaper to mass produce curriculum then to spend the money on fixing what's actually broken with the system.

It's cheaper to just not provide comprehensive healthcare. That has not stopped private healthcare insurers.

Ummm... the government forces them to provide comprehensive healthcare...

[Laissez-Faire]

It's cheaper to just not provide comprehensive healthcare. That has not stopped private healthcare insurers.

Ummm... the government forces them to provide comprehensive healthcare...

Heh, and not very well. Govenment didn't force them to get into the business, and hardly have companies only followed what government forces them to do. Government isn't the savior.

[Olthar]

Ah, so Louisiana is tired of continuously being outclassed be other states like Texas, Arizona, Alabama, and Mississippi and is trying to show everyone that it really is the worst state in the union. Well, it still needs a bit of catching up, but it's certainly well on its way.

[Norstal]

Funny how that's not actually true.

How?

Pretty damn competitive to be tenured at universities. Among other things.

[Trilobitia]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/01/louisiana-makes-bold-bid-_n_1563900.html

So what does Nationstates think of all this? I like it, the government has obviously not been doing a good job at handling education...besides, it'll give parents the choice as to what school they want their kids to attend. Full steam ahead!

Louisiana is doing poorly in education, as most southern states near them do. It hasn't been proven that private corporations will be able to handle the issue better, or that the state government can't fix its problems.

The mantra repeated by people in favor of privatization has always been about the ability to choose. Do you really think about anything you say before you say it? No student is forced to attend a public school. There are private schools and home schools available for parents to send their children to. As demonstrated by the fact, this issue is not about choice.