On 17 Feb 2004 15:11:12 -0800, jim rozen
wrote:

In article , John Flanagan says...

A voucher doesn't give you the right to attend any school. Only the
ability to pay for it if they accept you. Just like a college.

OK, we're going to ignore the voucher proponents who say that
public school are so awful that instituting vouchers will mean
their certain demise - because then your comment above would
be quite *un*true - all vouchered kids have to attend somewhere,
so the vouchers really would be an instant in at any school in that
case.

But agreeing for a moment that public schools will still exist
after "V" day, it's apparent that the brighter kids will abandon
them instantly and leave only the problem kids behind: the
kids who cost more to educate. How does a voucher plan ensure
that the left-behinds will still get a decent education?

Jim

Its obvious. The public schools will finally have to get off their
overstuffed dead asses and be competative with the private schools.
When they see their tax dollars dribbling away..they will indeed
institute improvements. Standardized testing will make sure everyone
is working on a level playing field. Those that cannot teach worth a
**** will be dumped in favor of those who can actually teach.
Administration costs will fall, as they remove the deadwood and
streamline. With fewer kids in the public schools, wear and tear on
the infrastructure will be reduced and for those children who tear up
the place, are "unteachable" etc..they will be finally handled the way
they should be. With the proper punishment and expulsion as needed.
Im sure there will be Boot Camp type schools that will spring up for
problem children that will accept vouchers. It will really suck to be
an asshole child who wants to disrupt things.

Gunner

"To be civilized is to restrain the ability to commit mayhem.
To be incapable of committing mayhem is not the mark of the civilized,
merely the domesticated." - Trefor Thomas