An opponent of school voucher programs talks with three female opponents at a successful campaign to eliminate programs in Utah on Nov. 6, 2007. School voucher programs are designed to provide students with a fixed dollar amount per year to attend the school of their choice.
The concept of these programs has been a principal topic politically, economically, constitutionally, and socially, and this concern has long been praised or detested by various kinds of people: the general public as taxpayers, students, parents, and teachers.
In my opinion, a problem exists when funds for school vouchers rival with funds improving and benefitting America’s public schools.
First, school vouchers are unconstitutional because they violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment that calls for the separation of church and state, according to William Trainor, writer of the article "The Controversial School Voucher Issue."
Secondly, competition raised by school vouchers will result in the poor being left behind in substandard schools.
This income-influenced choice using school vouchers will initiate division and segregation among young and impressionable students. Why encourage a practice that Americans fought so hard to get rid of in the '50s and '60s?
Public schools are entirely funded by the U.S. government with U.S. tax dollars. If the parents of a school-age child choose for their son or daughter to attend a private school, then a voucher is distributed to the family, and it pays the cost of tuition at the private school.
Some people argue that, since every parent has the option to send his or her child to a religious or non-religious school, the government would not be infringing the First Amendment.
However, it is my conviction that school voucher programs infringe upon the wall of separation between church and state; vouchers offer state funds to religious schools.
Actually, about 85 percent of private schools are religious, according to the National Education Association (NEA).
The concept of these programs has been a principal topic politically, economically, constitutionally, and socially, and this concern has long been praised or detested by various kinds of people: the general public as taxpayers, students, parents, and teachers.
In my opinion, a problem exists when funds for school vouchers rival with funds improving and benefitting America’s public schools.
First, school vouchers are unconstitutional because they violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment that calls for the separation of church and state, according to William Trainor, writer of the article "The Controversial School Voucher Issue."
Secondly, competition raised by school vouchers will result in the poor being left behind in substandard schools.
This income-influenced choice using school vouchers will initiate division and segregation among young and impressionable students. Why encourage a practice that Americans fought so hard to get rid of in the '50s and '60s?
Public schools are entirely funded by the U.S. government with U.S. tax dollars. If the parents of a school-age child choose for their son or daughter to attend a private school, then a voucher is distributed to the family, and it pays the cost of tuition at the private school.
Some people argue that, since every parent has the option to send his or her child to a religious or non-religious school, the government would not be infringing the First Amendment.
However, it is my conviction that school voucher programs infringe upon the wall of separation between church and state; vouchers offer state funds to religious schools.
Actually, about 85 percent of private schools are religious, according to the National Education Association (NEA).
In fact, the NEA thinks school vouchers are a means of "eluding constitutional prohibitions against sponsoring religious practice and instruction."
In a major 2000 court case, Bush et al v. Holmes et al, Florida's school voucher program was ruled unconstitutional by a state circuit judge.
In addition, a 2000 Cleveland, Ohio, voucher program was rejected after a ruling found that the program was unconstitutional (Zelman v. Simmons-Harris).
“Americans must be free to contribute only to the religious groups of their choosing," according to Americans United for Separation of Church and State (AU).
To me, religious ideas and practices do not belong in the classroom, but in homes and churches.
If the government begins to fully subsidize religious schools, then what other kinds of schools could it start to back as well?
In a major 2000 court case, Bush et al v. Holmes et al, Florida's school voucher program was ruled unconstitutional by a state circuit judge.
In addition, a 2000 Cleveland, Ohio, voucher program was rejected after a ruling found that the program was unconstitutional (Zelman v. Simmons-Harris).
“Americans must be free to contribute only to the religious groups of their choosing," according to Americans United for Separation of Church and State (AU).
To me, religious ideas and practices do not belong in the classroom, but in homes and churches.
If the government begins to fully subsidize religious schools, then what other kinds of schools could it start to back as well?
Many supporters of school voucher programs think that, without competition, not a large enough incentive exists to improve efficiency. Private schools funded by school vouchers usually have a good reputation and produce positive results. They have accountability and can be more flexible with their teaching techniques. Measures of character and academic achievement are usually always better at private schools, too, according to Joe Messerli, author of the article "Should Government Vouchers Be Given to Pay for Private Schools?"
Lastly, Messerli writes that enthusiasts of school voucher programs deliberate that the option of expensive private schools often leads to schools that are slightly segregated, however, proposing vouchers would "present more diversity to all schools since choice would no longer be a factor of income."
In my opinion, school voucher programs do not offer a better alternative to government-provided education.
Choice will take away necessary funds from public schools and, consequently, the quality of public education in America will suffer. A voucher program is an unsatisfactory way to regulate access to an education.
Cost effectiveness is another problem with school voucher programs.
Instead of spending the reported $65 million a year by foundations and individuals to promote vouchers, according to the NEA, they should be using that money to help fund and improve already-established public schools.
Public schools are failing because they cannot manage to cover the escalating costs of teachers, technology, security, books, and supplies. They are also subject to government supervision and increased rules and regulations. A stricter control is placed on the teaching methods and education in the public school system. However, private schools are not held responsible to any oversight organization.
It is my belief that vouchers are not intended to assist low-income children; they are part of an elitist strategy to fund students in private schools.
“With the help of taxpayers’ dollars, private schools will be filled with well-to-do and middle-class students and a handful of the best, most motivated students from inner cities. Some public schools will be left with fewer dollars to teach the poorest of the poor," according to the Anti-Defamation League (ADL).
Moreover, private schools are often very costly and are not dispersed in urban or inner city areas, therefore, impoverished parents who cannot afford the private tuition have to resort to the public schools in their district, according to Messerli.
Lastly, Messerli writes that enthusiasts of school voucher programs deliberate that the option of expensive private schools often leads to schools that are slightly segregated, however, proposing vouchers would "present more diversity to all schools since choice would no longer be a factor of income."
In my opinion, school voucher programs do not offer a better alternative to government-provided education.
Choice will take away necessary funds from public schools and, consequently, the quality of public education in America will suffer. A voucher program is an unsatisfactory way to regulate access to an education.
Cost effectiveness is another problem with school voucher programs.
Instead of spending the reported $65 million a year by foundations and individuals to promote vouchers, according to the NEA, they should be using that money to help fund and improve already-established public schools.
Public schools are failing because they cannot manage to cover the escalating costs of teachers, technology, security, books, and supplies. They are also subject to government supervision and increased rules and regulations. A stricter control is placed on the teaching methods and education in the public school system. However, private schools are not held responsible to any oversight organization.
It is my belief that vouchers are not intended to assist low-income children; they are part of an elitist strategy to fund students in private schools.
“With the help of taxpayers’ dollars, private schools will be filled with well-to-do and middle-class students and a handful of the best, most motivated students from inner cities. Some public schools will be left with fewer dollars to teach the poorest of the poor," according to the Anti-Defamation League (ADL).
Moreover, private schools are often very costly and are not dispersed in urban or inner city areas, therefore, impoverished parents who cannot afford the private tuition have to resort to the public schools in their district, according to Messerli.
This practice leads me to believe that vouchers generate greater segregation of students by race and wealth.
Isn't America supposed to be the land of equal opportunity?
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment