I live in a rural area on the Appalachian’s in a state with no school choice/open enrollment. We have no charter school in our county. Many, many counties have no charter school option. There is one private school locally. A catholic school that charges tuition. Even if we had open enrollment, none of the schools around here are a good options. Typical rural area. There is one school that could possibly be an option but transportation would be a big issue- especially in the winter with the snow and ice. I’ve homeschooled. 4 of my kids. 3 have graduated already and 1 is entering 10th grade. My youngest 2 go to public school. The biggest issue in MY state is how schools are funded. I live in a rural area. Our median household income is $27K/yr. Our district spends the least per kid in the entire STATE. It shows. But go to a big city on the border and the public schools are top ranked. They have programs, attract the most talented teachers, have high college acceptance rates, and offer opportunities that kids where we live will never get. Schools need to be equally funded. That’s how we’re going to fix this. This is systemic and comes from the top.

Being Canadian I've never understood this model of funding. We get an amount of money per enrolled student regardless of where they're located, so that any school can operate more or less the same. I work in a school that's in a rather tough part of town but the teaching staff is top notch. Sorry to hear this.

I'm going to preface this with the idea that I don't agree with it. The reason it works this way is because we don't have true national level guidelines for schools. We have some broad basics that the Federal Department of Education enforces but to ensure that we don't encroach in "states rights", states have a pretty broad range of freedom in their own department of educations. Different requirements for graduations, different rules for funding, wildly different pay scales across the nation. Sure it allows for the likes of Mississippi to not be treated the same as California but it causes way more problems then it supposedly "helps".

The ironic thing is that a LOT of places actually CUT funding for underperforming schools, which leads to further detriments to the quality of their education. I worked for a couple years at a school in the Bronx, it was insane how little we were given to work with. People hoarded printer paper like it was gold. Edited to fix a minor typo.

I agree with you, with one exception as to funding. The funding should be equitable, but not equal. Cost of Living must be taken into account when it comes to wages. We can’t pay teachers like the Post Office does of a starting wage of $20 an hour no matter where you live. In some areas, a 60 year old 3br/2ba 1,200 sq ft house costs $90,000. In my area, the same houses costs 1.7M. Teachers need to be able to afford to live everywhere. Schools should be funded so that after COL issues are addressed, the remaining funding that doesn’t vary based on COL should be the same. But “school choice” just refunds our public schools and lets people pretend the real problems don’t exist.

This is a good point! Yes, CoL needs to be part is the equation.

>I’ve homeschooled. IIRC, school choice programs give money to homeschoolers too. That way people in rural areas can benefit from them too. >Schools need to be equally funded. That’s how we’re going to fix this. I agree with this to a point. Funding only goes so far. California and Baltimore spend 3 times as much money per student as Utah does, but have worse educational outcomes.

Well, since we have no school choice I got no money to hs. 🤣 Do CA and MD distribute funds equally? Bc both places have glaring economic divides that would still mean that there’s enough of a difference in funding district to district that would bring the overall stats of the state down. Things will never get better until we properly fund poor districts. There are smart kids in poor areas. We have a set of twins that graduated a few years ago that both scored perfect SAT scores. They’re the youngest of 5 and their 3 older brothers all skipped grades and scored close to perfect on the SATs, too. Obviously a genetically blessed family. We have really smart kids in this poor town and they just aren’t getting the recognition and opportunities that they deserve.

>Do CA and MD distribute funds equally? I don't know about California, but Baltimore schools actually get more funding per student than the rest of Maryland. In fact, they get more funding per student than most public schools in the entire US. Despite that, they have some of the worst education outcomes. While funding is important, it's clearly not the silver bullet to fixing schools.

It’s not. I know that. It’s just not actually possible to fix anything until the funding issue is worked out across the board. Then we can pick through and see what issue has to be tackled next.

Baltimore City schools also need to provide more services. There are way, WAY more students experiencing homelessness, trauma, poverty, etc in Baltimore than in, say, Montgomery County. So that means more social workers, school psychologists, etc. More Title 1 schools. More schools whose PTA can't make up the difference.

My state has school choice but offers no money whatsoever to homeschoolers

I do not judge individual parents who are trying to do right by their kids at all. The issue comes in when faith in public school is systematically dismantled across the population. Imagine a world where public school has become the 2nd-tier choice unilaterally, looked down on by the public, where your kids only go if you have no other choice. Enrollment is down, so funding gets cut even further than it already is. Class breakdowns have an even higher proportion of disruptive and/or academically behind kids, because parents with the means and give-a-crap to parent well and spend lots of time working with their kids have gone to private and charters. Teachers become even more burnt out and jaded. Are kids going to come out of that school with a good education? Oops, now we've created an explicit class system again! Wealthy families get a good education, poor families do not. A large chunk of the population does not understand high-school level math and science, or how to analyze double meanings and symbolism in literature, and thus are easily manipulated and cannot effectively maintain our current structures of society through their jobs (fewer engineers, the medical field crisis becomes even worse, conspiracy theories and political division become worse, etc). 100% of "powerful" positions go to people who came from wealth. Wealth inequality skyrockets. Basically a lot of societal issues we're already facing become exponentially worse instead of better.

This is exactly it. Unfortunately, the money will always follow/prioritize schools where rich White children attend. If the rich, White families exclusively send their kids to private schools/home schools, that takes funding and resources from the public schools which will be almost exclusively poor and minority. We need everyone invested in the public school system or it will never improve

No thanks. I don't want my children in classes where half the time spent is on children with behavior issues. They are there to learn, not be babysat

I have a kid in public school, public schools that are exceptionally well funded because they get money from the DOD on top of state and local funding. The only reason she's still there is because I have less faith in my ability to teach her and my other option is a religious school and I won't expose her to fairy tales that weren't written by the brothers Grimm

Thank you for your post. You make excellent points while understanding many parents just want to do right by their kids. It's a tough situation. Poor kids shouldn't be resigned to a second class education which could easily happen if all the rich and middle class parents abandon public schools. On the other hand, nobody should be forced into a crappy school if a better option is available. I don't know if there is a perfect answer, but again, thank you for your thoughts.

I mean, faith in public school has already decreased a lot. And this is not the fault of teachers, who are doing their best. But its the fault of districts and admins passing kids on, not punishing disruptive kids, watering down everything. People are losing faith for very valid reasons. And its not fair to expect individual parents to let their kids suffer for the greater good.

Vouchers solve this problem. When every kid has a certain amount to spend on education, the family can spend it in the way they see fit without completely screwing poor people

Vouchers do not solve this problem. A private school can set any tuition amount they want. If the kids get a $1500 voucher, but tuition is $8000, the poor kids are still not going to have access to that school.

yes there will still be some inequality. there is no way to solve that isn't a $1500 voucher better than no voucher?

No, it isn’t. A parent who can afford $0 in tuition doesn’t care if they get $1500 discount, because they still can’t afford the $6500. “Some inequality” = the exact same problem. Vouchers. Solve. Nothing.

Not when private schools just increase tuition when vouchers are implemented. Look at Arizona. After vouchers, private schools raised tuition on average 10%-20%. Arizona also found that poor families weren't using the vouchers. They were mostly used by families who were already enrolled in private schools or by middle/upper class suburban families in good public school districts.

>Given the current state of public schools, what would you have a parent who wants the best outcome for their child do? Be an actual parent. I can't tell you how much the way that kids are raised affects their education. As a long-term sub last year, I had a kid who proudly stated his parents let him play video games 3 hours a night then 6 hours on the weekends. School choice isn't going to change bad parenting.

I agree parenting goes a long way. Parents who make their kids do their homework and limit screentime will have more successful kids than parents who let their kids do whatever they want and play video games all day. But I doubt even the best parents could make a kid learn effectively at a school where he has to constantly watch out for the one kid who throws chairs at people and interrupts the teacher.

Then fund the schools better so we have more resources. School counselor. School nurse. Child psychologist. School social worker. Special education teacher. Educational assistants. Typically the kid throwing chairs needs help.

[удалено]

Then write laws preventing that. And if you're not a legislator, vote. Educate people. Organize.

Parenting only goes so far towards fixing school issues when you're the parent of a "good" kid. It kind of goes like this: Kid - Johnny is bullying me. Me - calls school. Told Johnny will be dealt with. Kid - Johnny keeps bullying me. Me - goes to school, told (against rules) that Johnny is a problem child and they're already doing all they legally can. Kid - Johnny will not stop bullying me. I don't want to go to school anymore Me - goes back to school, requests class change to get kid away from Johnny, told it can't be managed. Kid - Johnny hit me. Me - goes back to school, told Johnny can't be suspended to due to IEP for behavioral issues, but his team is working on it. Kid - *** beats the everloving crap out of Johnny*** ***gets suspended**** Johnny then moves on to his next target. Rinse. Wash. Repeat.

It fucks other things up too. The “good” kids get the least amount of instructional help or resources. A 25 kid class with 10 on IEPs, half coming and going for SPED services, and a few “problem” kids who don’t qualify for the above shoves those few kids who behave, participate, genuinely want to learn, and do well to the very back. One person can only do so much. The real kicker is those “good” kids are the ones who end up in homeschool or charter and thrive because they don’t rely on public school services and they have attentive parents who care about their education. It’s very hard to have your kid come home saying they missed out on X because the class couldn’t behave, they are seated next to a kid who interferes with their learning because they’re being used as a buffer because they won’t encourage them, they need help with Y but didn’t have time to ask because the teacher was busy, etc.

If your kid is gonna learn, they're gonna learn. Surprisingly, kids are extremely resilient.

I disagree. When kids grow up in an environment where most of their mental energy is spent trying to survive, it keeps them from learning as well as they otherwise could have.

Eh, I played a tremendous amount of videogames and I gave a degree in Astrophysics and a solid career. Had my own desktop computer when I was 5 and all the handheld devices I wanted. I have amazing parents and I think that matters far more then if you do or dont play a bunch of digital games.

Fair enough. Limiting screentime is probably much less important than having good parents. But I assume in order to get your degree, you had to do your homework and study right? And I'm sure your parents encouraged you to do your homework while you were in k-12 school.

Homework? What's that? Our district got rid of it. They also got rid of spelling. And tests outside of the state mandated ones. So, no studying is needed. No finals for the high school kids, they have final "projects" that are glorified arts and crafts. And next year they're getting rid of assigning grades.  My kids go to private school.

There shouldn’t be nightly “homework” for elementary school kids. Getting rid of that IS better. I wish mine would; I had to be satisfied that kindergarden doesn’t have homework.

They checked my grades, paid for college, and made sure I knew that would stop if I failed. They never dictated when homework would happen or what I did other than I had to help out with chores before I was allowed to go do whatever. Im lucky and thankful for what they provided, and I help them now as much as they helped me. I have the best parents.

Exactly. There’s nothing wrong with playing video games as a child.

Same. Not me but I knew a lot of guys that played lots of video games. Esp in college! They’re all successful and I’m pretty sure they still play video games.

I played so much World of Warcraft in college that game was insane and everyone was playing it.

I don’t agree. Sorry. Parenting does not overcome systematic problems in schools and there is an age where peer pressure is far more important in determining outcomes. Children spend 1/3 or more of the day with tired and overtaxed teachers and low life’s. The other 1/3rd living, and 1/3rd sleeping. In a day if you are parent who needs to work to survive, you are lucky to spend a few hours at the most with your child. The rest of the time they are with lowlifes in public school and the internet. Good intentional parenting can help, but you can’t ignore the time your child is being peer pressured into becoming a fool. On top of that, the way they tie your hands to keep you from parenting is wild. I read an article that stated that access to phones and the internet is a right for kids. The best you can do is send your child to a good school where the peer pressure is to excel and unfortunately that means avoiding lowlifes.

Would you say that good intentional parenting doesn't make rules about which peers you can hang out with and when? Parents guide their children in the few hours they have with their kids every day to make sure their on the right track. A lot of good parenting leads to making good relationships with others.

I live in Minnesota, and we have open enrollment. This means that people don't have to send their kid to their local district they can put them in any district (as long as there are openings). In many places, school choice seems to be more about getting kids into private or charter schools. The problem with that is they don't have to take students they don't want. They also don't pay their teachers as well. There also has been a problem at times with charter schools just shutting down and leaving students without a school. But the biggest problem is that it's a way to privatize all schools and destroy public education.

>The problem with that is they don't have to take students they don't want. I think this is part of the appeal. These schools don't have to take in the students that disrupt class or assault others. >But the biggest problem is that it's a way to privatize all schools and destroy public education. Again though, if you're a parent and the public school(s) in your area don't provide a safe and effective learning environment for your kid, what would you do?

It also means that they can turn away students who aren’t violent but have a learning disability. Or that they can kick a student out because they don’t want to have to provide adequate support.

If a school were to turn someone away solely because of a disability that doesn't affect others in today's political climate, there would be severe social and legal consequences for them.

No there’s not. All private and charter schools are well within their rights to do this. And they do it all the time. 

Private and charter schools do this all the time.

Got a source?

I went to a catholic school k-12. No special ed at all. This is also common teacher knowledge. Charter schools and private schools do not have to play by the rules. Don't have to do state testing. Can hire unlicensed teachers (religious schools). The list goes on.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2021/01/17/yes-some-charter-schools-do-pick-their-students-its-not-myth/ https://www.edweek.org/leadership/charter-schools-more-likely-to-ignore-special-education-applicants-study-finds/2018/12 https://edsource.org/reports/charter-schools-enroll-fewer-students-with-disabilities-get-less-funding-report-finds Its not universal, and they’re not supposed to, but lots of schools—in my experience particularly with charter schools that cater towards lower income students—do unofficially exclude students who fall anywhere on the disability spectrum.

Also to add on to that, even if a private or charter school accepts a student with special needs, they are not legally required to provide any sort of special services to those children, only public schools are required to provide as much support as an individual child needs.

Yes, this is what got my parents. They enrolled my little brother in a private school and then became horrified when they learned he needed accommodation and they basically shrugged their shoulders and said they didn’t have to. Despite very hefty tuition. My parents switched him to a high school in their home district and got him a 504 plan and it was SO much better for him!

And that is what people don’t understand. The only schools that need to meet the needs of all learners are public schools. Private school are under no obligation to provide any additional services and most don’t because it would cost them more money and they don’t want to pay. School choice would leave a majority of the non-“typical” students behind in underfunded, understaffed public schools. Any student that had a learning, emotional, physical, social, etc disability is screwed with school choice. The people promoting school choice don’t think about (or even care) about these kids. I always tell people that unless you are going to a special school specific to your difference, any neuro-diverse kid is going to do better in a public school where they will receive all the resources they need.

>https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2021/01/17/yes-some-charter-schools-do-pick-their-students-its-not-myth/ This source is talking about kids with disabilities who disrupt class and assault others. That's why I specified that in my original comment. >https://www.edweek.org/leadership/charter-schools-more-likely-to-ignore-special-education-applicants-study-finds/2018/12 The way disability applications were done in this study makes me think the same was done here. I'm having trouble accessing the report on your last source and only read the summary, which is the same as the second source.

I worked at a private school. Sometimes parents would be told that their child’s needs were too great for the school and they wouldn’t get the help they deserved from us because we didn’t have access to certain programs.

Private schools do this all the time. I thought it was common knowledge that they can and do refuse to take students with learning disabilities.

I thought it was common knowledge too.

Well, my options where I live is I can send my kid to a different district because we have open enrollment. What I'm trying to say is that it might be a better option for states to do this. At the school I work at, it actually has been used by parents to separate kids that are toxic when they are together. Also, I live in a rural area, so charter schools and private schools don't really exist. I do wish our states would work on helping schools improve instead of just trying to ruin public education. I think we can make public schools better.

It sounds like open enrollment might be a better answer than school choice. Thank you for pointing that out to me.

Yeah we have had it since the 90s. It seems to work.

Sometimes the problem with open enrollment is that all the bullied kids end up at the public charter or neighboring school. Then eventually the parents of the bullies find out their kid is not doing well or they get sick of all the calls about behavior and they open enroll those kids. The local public charter is mostly kids that are bullies or were bullies. It is an absolute mess. Many of the successful neighboring district do not have the resources for the influx of kids plus the small town school is now 40% opened enrolled from the big district. No longer much of a community school when half your kids are from another town. Plus the bus picks up at a few locations from the big city, but it is not accessible to all students. Additionally these kids would have walked to their local school, now they are being bused a city over. Deteration of local relationships and bad for the environment and we are only moving around problems, not fixing them. I am un minnesota and open enrolled an exchange student.

It's definitely part of the appeal. If students cannot behave themselves in class, they cannot be in class. It's not fair to the 18 kids actually trying to learn to be disrupted by 2 or 3 troublemakers. If parents cannot avoid behavior problems at public schools, we will just avoid public schools entirely.

The biggest issues with charter schools are their illegal habits. I work in an area that is filled with charters. The first half of my teaching experience was in charters because I couldn't get into a district school. I'm now in a district school and the differences are stark. Charter schools will accept those who are easier to teach. They will force out students who don't match their clientele, or will lower their test scores. I've had it happen to my students, students I've advocated for who were good kids. Charter schools often will pick teachers that are easy to manipulate, will accept less pay, and don't have a teaching certificate. Or even teaching experience. One of the teachers I shared a wall with, preferred to play laser tag games instead of teaching math. I've had students come into my class who don't know how to hold a pencil, but when I brought the issue to administration I was told the teacher in question was a friend and needed the job. When I taught in a charter school, I wasn't given a lunch. I had to eat with the students. This sounds good on paper. But add-in I had to supervise recesses, dismissal, and arrival. I had no time without students. No time to prep lessons or grade. In order to go to the bathroom I had to walk my class up to the office have them sit against the wall and then run into the restroom. I'm in a public school now. My students now have more specials than any of my previous students had before. They have a beautiful library with a librarian. A PE teacher who is certified to teach any child about being healthy and fit no matter their physical abilities. We have a full music program, and art. My students with special needs are given every accommodation and help they need. My students who have needs for enrichment are able to join a program for that. Students who are struggling but not special needs are caught sooner, and given help before they need to be enrolled in special education. I have time in the day to go to the bathroom, eat my lunch, and prep lessons for my class. I'm a better teacher now that I'm able to breathe and take a break without students. My class sizes have been smaller in the public school than they ever were in a charter school. No school is a one size fit all. Some schools will be better then others, some will be a better fit for your child. But what happens behind the scenes is why teachers tend to not support charters.

Choose a private school if you'd like - but don't expect the public to pay for it.

It makes sense to have the public pay for a child's education. Who cares whether the $10-20k spent per year follows the child to a public school or private school? It gets spent either way.

It's taking all that money from a public school and giving it to the private school for a student that wasn't going to a public school anyways. So you just gifted those parents the tuition while enriching the private school. You have, also, just made it harder to pay for utilities and salaries at the public school who still have the kids that private school wont take.

Nothing is a gift, they were already paying twice- remember that. That is not fair to pay twice.

The parents aren’t paying twice. They pay their taxes and then they voluntarily choose to pay for an additional premium service poor people don’t get to have. They could save the extra funds and send their kids to public school too. The only people paying twice are the public if the voucher system gets put in place.

They are making a choice to pay extra. They are not required to send their child to private school.

It's a transfer of public money into private enterprise.

Can't the same be said for FAFSA and veteran student payments that go to private colleges?

First, you need to uncoil the Vet part out of that. Education funding is part of the compensation pledged to those that serve.

Fair enough. What about FAFSA though?

I'd be OK with FAFSA money only going to public colleges.

I respect your consistency then.

There’s no such thing as FAFSA money. FAFSA doesn’t give any money out. Even private scholarships use FAFSA information.

FAFSA itself does not give out money.

Well the taxpayers that fund it would care, considering that they have no representation for private schools whereas public schools are mandated to have school boards and meet various legal standards and transparency requirements.

Some states like Wisconsin and Arizona have a voucher system where the money for a students education follows them no matter where they're being educated. I wish more states would do this! 

School choice is a great way to ruin public education irreparably. Parents that are able and willing to drive their kids elsewhere can get their kids the best education while children of working and absentee parents will be stuck going to whatever public school is closest. As attendance drops in those public schools, funding drops and that means fewer supplies and lower teacher salaries. So many teachers will leave those public schools for schools that can pay them a livable salary. That just means the public schools will continue to go downhill and the cycle will continue-public schools losing funding➡️less opportunities for students➡️more students leaving➡️even less funding for said public schools and the cycle continues. As a parent, I understand wanting to take my kid out of a really bad/dangerous class or wanting to get them the best education possible so I believe we definitely need reform in the public education system. But as a teacher, I can’t support school choice as it is because I think it will be disproportionately harmful to students in poverty.

Absolutely. Parents can do so much to improve public schools, it’s just that so few want to do anything. My school hasn’t had a PTA in over a decade. We have to bribe parents to come to conferences, etc. We teacher ms work our asses off for our students, but we’re hemmed in by stupid state and federal laws, lack of funding, lack of resources, lack of parent support and engagement, and the shitty attitude a lot of students have these days.

Right? We as teachers are fully prepared to provide a wonderful education to all students but it’s very hard to do so when we are so limited by basically everything, like you mentioned. School choice isn’t the answer especially when parents could fix so much just by being involved in the schools.

Well some parents don't want to wait around for the same school that hasn't got their stuff together for the last 20 years. Half of my kid who is in high school teachers have given up and just a bump on the log. They sit around just assign book work or they let kids bully and hit other kids without stopping it. There is alot of teachers that don't do their job and parents that don't want to raise decent kids. Some parents that want to give their kids a better option isn't willing to wait around for their schools to fix issues they been ignoring for 20 plus years. There is no guarantee certain public schools will change.

So you sit quietly and don’t say anything?

>As a parent, I understand wanting to take my kid out of a really bad/dangerous class or wanting to get them the best education possible so I believe we definitely need reform in the public education system. I think that's the ideal solution. Improve public schools so that school choice isn't a desirable solution.

But they won't improve them. That's the issue. People can't wait around for them to fix the same issues they been ignoring for 20 years. By the time they fix it their kid will be done with school.

I’m in Minnesota as well and I have a big issue with open enrollment. Who do you think are the students who change districts? They have involved parents, parents who can drive them to the other school, they are usually higher achieving students and, most importantly, they are leaders among their peers. There is a drain of student leaders and the students who don’t or can’t open enroll now have a worse situation than that which prompted the others to leave. And “drain” is the right word because the schools students are leaving are left to literally go down the drain. And it bothers me that academics aren’t always the reason to leave- many parents want their kids in schools with the best facilities and coaches. It’s sad that by high school, some of the teams have no room for the community kid who grew up playing with their friends. When “stars” transfer in, many of the local kids are just not good enough! AND, we still have the problem of white flight!’

I see how a "drain" can negatively impact the school being left behind. But on the other hand, is it fair to force parents to send their kids into worse schools where they won't be able to learn/accomplish as much?

Let teachers close their doors and teach. Let them have students removed and elsewhere in the school they can watch videos of the lessons they miss, like during Covid but in school and supervised. Pay for the presence of more adults in the gen-pop (🙃), including all teachers without little gatherings of principals and paras not paying attention. More security at EVERY door. Kids will learn. You do 4 years of tight discipline and the entire vibe of the school will change. But ffs, get principals who are competent. I taught at the school where the trans girl was hit (Hopkins High School) and the principal never called the cops or an ambulance. The girl spent 2 nights in the hospital!! Lately it seems you barely get that for major surgery. It can be done but it will cost, cost a lot, but if we want to save public education, it has to be done.

Doesn’t that actually give the lesser assertive/achieving children an opportunity to rise to be the leaders and the “high” achievers?

Would that be lowering standards? I really don’t know. I was a teacher and we had a class go through the high school with absolutely no leadership. It was obvious and they only succeeded because of the class ahead and the class behind.

Yes and no to lowering standards. If you take the 3 top scoring students out of a classroom, the next three have now become the top scoring students. They now get treated as the top scoring students. Do they get as many questions right on a math test as the 3 who left used to get right? Probably not, at least at first. But then the teacher slows it down to teach to the learning pace of the new top 3 and the abilities of the remaining students— and if the top 3 didn’t “get it”, none of the rest of the class did either, and you can’t move on until at least some of the class “gets it”. So now, on the subsequent tests, those 3 do get the same amount right as the old top 3, because the test is later or otherwise paced with the new top three. Is it “lower standards” to change the pace, and use the new top students/middle students as the same barometer you did before? Is it fair to say those kids are “excelling”, even though the class is moving slower/a bit differently? I say no.

My area is open and has quite a few charter options. I am sending my child to public school. Private schools can do as the please with their own money. Public schools are subject to whatever government mandates are.l, whole also being limited to the slow trickle of government funds. Charter schools should be outright banned, they are a drain on public resources because they like to pretend they are private, and while they do get some money from parents, they also get to take advantage of government money and programs while at the same time not adhering to any of the mandated standards.

It's a tough call. I would not want to send my son to the public school we are zoned for, but I do vote in the local elections. If I found out that a student was disrupting my child's education (which has a lot more to do with bad laws and admin than the school zone), I'd raise hell. I'd be meeting with the teacher, principal, superintendent, and attend board meetings if I had to. Parents and communities at large have to advocate for positive change, or we will run out of public options altogether. I can't afford private school and lots of deserving families and children can't either. I want better for all of us, not just those who can afford tuition.

A lot of times the parents who support school choice are also lawnmower parents - those whose kids can do no wrong, and expect their kids to get the highest possible grade regardless of what they actually know or how they behave in class. It's something that is primarily intended to preserve inequity by providing privileges for the privileged (at taxpayer expense) while leaving everyone else out in the cold.

Public schools are fine. Feel free to send a kid to a fly by night charter or homeschool them, but at some point, many come crawling back. We have school choice in our district and state. The district schools actually have some different programs that are unique. I'm totally cool with a parent driving their own kid to and from a school they specifically want to go to. You can't ride the bus, though. Mostly, I think they're scared of ghosts.

I am interested in this comment! Homeschool or a charter-homeschool combo in my area has gotten SO popular. I have a friend who is against my local (well funded) public elementary and wants to homeschool. She didn’t want to send her kid to the elementary program at the Montessori school, (even though our kids attend prek there) because the teacher for elementary is unlicensed. But by that logic, she is also unlicensed to teach so I don’t see a huge difference. She wants to focus more on life skills, practical skills, music and arts for her 1st grader, and believes the academics can come later. This thought process is prevalent in my area.

That’s because it is the leading school of thought in Europe, from child development experts, behavioral psychologists, and neuroscientists. Academics CAN wait until 7, unless the child is the one expressing the desire to learn academics earlier. Social skills and child lead play are more important at those ages.

School choice pulls money from already struggling public schools, leaving behind the most vulnerable children who need the most support.

What is a parent who wants the best for their child supposed to do? Suck it up and accept the bad quality of their public schools?

Hold the superintendent and school committees accountable when they make bad choices. Become active in your community. Sadly, teachers are not listened to, but when it comes to parents, if enough complain, a change will be made.

Those are great ideas! I bet running for school board could help too if the parent has time.

If you are a selfish and don’t care about other people or the community as a whole, then by all means, support school choice and pulling federal funding from already struggling public schools and give it to religious institutions. Fuck the separation of church and state and fuck any kids with a learning difference, am I right? /s If you aren’t selfish and do care about the community, you work to changing things in that community to make it better for everyone, not just yourself. You can also choose to send your kid to a different school NOT at the expense of other children. Look for a charter school, apply for scholarships to private schools, homeschool. For profit schools who have the ability to choose which students they accept are not going to choose students that will cost them money, which is pretty much any kid with a physical, emotional, behavioral, or learning difference.

>If you are a selfish and don’t care about other people or the community as a whole, then by all means, support school choice and pulling federal funding from already struggling public schools and give it to religious institutions. Fuck the separation of church and state and fuck any kids with a learning difference. Not all private schools are religious. Also, if most of the community doesn't care about fixing the schools, I'm not sure what one parent can feasibly do. There's a difference between being selfish, and taking care of yourself/your family. >If you aren’t selfish and do care about the community, you work to changing things in that community to make it better for everyone, not just yourself. That only works if enough people in the community want to make it better. >You can also choose to send your kid to a different school NOT at the expense of other children. Not everyone can afford to homeschool or send their kid to another school without the money that would've been spent on their kid at public school following them. That's the point of school choice programs. >For profit schools who have the ability to choose which students they accept are not going to choose students that will cost them money, which is pretty much any kid with a physical, emotional, behavioral, or learning difference. I want to focus on behavioral here. Is it fair to require a school to admit and keep a kid that frequently disrupts class and assaults others? Sure that kid is a human being with the right to get an education, but so are the other 19 kids in the class. And the needs of 19 kids outweigh the needs of one.

The red flag I’m seeing here is that you are only focused on student behaviors and that you only care about yourself and your children. I’ve read through all the comments and you are only here looking for a fight, you don’t actually want reasonable answers from the teachers in this community. I gave you alternatives to public school that don’t cost a parent money, besides possibly transportation, how convenient of you not to mention them in your attempt to argue. If you are that concerned about the behavior of other students and can’t afford to homeschool, maybe you should enroll your kids in a virtual charter school. It’s free and they won’t have to be near all the problem behaviors you are worried about.

>on student behaviors Poor student behavior affects the whole class. I don't see how bringing it up is a problem. >that you only care about yourself and your children. Good parents want what's best for their children. That doesn't mean they should be snowplow parents and remove all obstacles or protect them from the consequences of their mistakes, but I fail to see what's wrong with wanting to provide your child with the best learning environment possible. >I’ve read through all the comments and you are only here looking for a fight, you don’t actually want reasonable answers from the teachers in this community. You must've missed my comment where I agreed open enrollment is a great alternative to school choice. >I gave you alternatives to public school that don’t cost a parent money No you didn't. Private schools aren't free and getting scholarships is very difficult and not guaranteed. Particularly in some areas. Charter schools have limited spots. Depending on where you live, there may not even be one as other commenters pointed out. And homeschooling costs money since a parent has to stay home and do it rather than go to work. Hence why school choice programs exist. They give the parents money to homeschool so one can stay home to do the homeschooling.

Ok, so we have circles back around to how you only care about your family and fuck every child with any sort of disability (which included behavior issues, since those are usually tied to some other disadvantage and through no fault of the child). Since you are obsessed with behavior : if 1 out of 20 students isn’t behaving appropriately, you remove that one student, not the other 19. There clearly is an unaddressed issue that one student is facing that should be addressed, but if you pull the funding for the other 19 kids, there is nothing left to help that gain, you’ve implied that you don’t care what happens to that child (which is the biggest difference between you and the teachers here, teachers do care about every child, not just their own.). I could go on for hours about this idea, but you won’t read it, so I won’t waste my time. Your single minded argument for school choice isn’t going to chance anyone’s mind here any more than out more experienced arguments are going to change yours. You came here to argue, not to actually get new information to help your query. Also, schools aren’t daycares and teachers aren’t free babysitters. Don’t treat them as such.

>Ok, so we have circles back around to how you only care about your family and fuck every child with any sort of disability (which included behavior issues, since those are usually tied to some other disadvantage and through no fault of the child). At some point, you have to put your foot down. You can't just be a doormat and always sacrifice yours and your family's wellbeing for the sake of one other person. And just because a kid's poor behavior stems from a disability or something else that isn't their fault, doesn't mean they have the right to disrupt the education of everyone else. >if 1 out of 20 students isn’t behaving appropriately, you remove that one student, not the other 19. I completely agree with this! But public schools either can't or won't remove that one kid because if the kid has a disability (even a minor one) or is a racial minority, they might receive a discrimination lawsuit. Non public schools don't have to worry about that which makes them appealing to parents who want their kids to learn in a disruption free environment. Hence why the other 19 end up being the ones who move. >you’ve implied that you don’t care what happens to that child I didn't imply any such thing. I merely stated that the rights of that one child end where the rights of the other children begin. Just like my right to swing my arms ends where your face begins. >You came here to argue, not to actually get new information to help your query. That's not true. I've gained a lot from the other commenters who had worthwhile things to say. Shame you aren't one of them. >Also, schools aren’t daycares and teachers aren’t free babysitters. Don’t treat them as such. I agree. They are meant to provide an education. As such, they should be allowed to remove obstacles to that goal.

You just keep saying the same bs over and over again (except not you are crying race as well). I get it, you don’t understand how schools work. I’m sorry if you didn’t find my factual information worthwhile, that just proves my point that you are only here to argue.

What factual information have you provided? All you've done is call me selfish for wanting a better learning environment for my children and imply that the rights of a poorly behaved student trump everyone else's.

>But public schools either can't or won't remove that one kid because if the kid has a disability (even a minor one) or is a racial minority, they might receive a discrimination lawsuit. I mean, no? That's not what happens. Kids are removed from class all the time.

Right? Not even a teacher, but married to one and he teaches at our district's alternative campus. He gets kids with IEPs all the time. They're still educated, they're just moved to another campus for a time with a much stricter behavior policy.

Some teachers do act like babysitters cause they don't teach.

Why should they only care about their child? The school doesn't care when kids are bullied, they don't care if teachers are horrible their job, they don't care if the bathroom doors even have locks. The public schools haven't given a crap about our kids in years. They never will. The school board doesn't care or they wouldn't be paying such high salaries to the higher ups when their school district sucks. Why should a parent care about their community when their community don't care about their kids?

Private school doesn't mean religious, most private schools are MESA here in California. They are really incredible schools that allow a child an amazing experience with qualified teachers. It also guarantees students do not have to go to school with gang bangers who don't want an education.

I've asked this question as well, and never got a real answer. But yeah if their "solution" is us throwing our kids under the bus, then it's going to have to go back to the drawing board because that is never going to happen. As a parent it is my responsibility to provide the best possible learning environment for my child. Not going to apologize for that. Our middle child goes to a five-figure tuition middle school, and the student body is as homogeneous as one would expect. But if school choice were more of a thing, more families would be able to send their kids to this academy. Why does Ed reform have to be about dragging down the good kids?

Better question: Why aren't teachers under the same umbrella as bus drivers and assaulting them is considered the same as assaulting a government official? Why do we allow physically apparent, violent students to stay in the classrooms? I don't have anything to say about those wanting the best for their children. If every parent was, we would be solving this crap already

It is bad. If you have choice, one school will be the "best" and will max out while the other school that needs resources can't get any because "not enough students" or some bs like that. Kids just need to go to school that is closest to them. So with school choice the "best schools" and most popular schools get all the funding while the schools that actually need the funds will not see much since their student population remains low.

My district has open enrollment, but my public high school has a lot of students coming from around the city because we have a competitive magnet program and some of the best scores in the city. We *are* looking at dropping enrollment because the entire city is looking at dropping enrollment--people are just having fewer kids. But the open enrollment hasn't been terrible. If anything, it lets awful karen parents take their little angels away. And if I was a parent, I certainly wouldn't want my child in some of the city's schools--certainly not the charters because I hear what stupidity masquerades as academics there, but there's also at least one public that I wouldn't trust if my kid was a darker shade than white. I do wish that the charters and private schools were forced to keep their students, that they couldn't push out sped kids or kids that they think aren't going to pass the state test. I wish that, if they took a kid, they can't pawn them back off on public schools. They want to be considered better, then they can show us little public schools how much better they are. All this said--parents who take an active role in their child's life are going to have children with higher academic achievement simply by virtue of the parents giving a damn about them. If the public schools only kept the kids whose parents had to opt in, of course our scores would go up, and probably by leaps and bounds.

I would want them to be realistic about what private and charter schools look like. Abbott Elementary has a great episode about charter schools. The majority of people using school vouchers would have been able to afford private school anyway, and the voucher doesn’t give them enough to go to private school if they couldn’t afford it in the first place. I went to Catholic schools pre-k through 12th grade, and the foolishness is still there. Hell, my high school’s nickname was a rip off of how many kids went to rehab. The difference is at a private school they kick you out *if* you don’t donate enough money. There was a kid my junior year who beat the crap out of some kid in the bathroom and had literally no consequences because his parents said they wouldn’t donate anymore if they punished him.

Honestly I think most of them do it for political reasons. Many of them have the most problematic kids themselves, the schools aren't the only problem, the parents and the children are creating most of the problems. I'd like to find the school full of kids that have good parenting at home and don't have behavior problems at school. I mean I'm sure there is a handful out there, but the majority of kids are being raised by or on technology and that is changing their development in a very negative way. I think trying to switch schools until you find the one that'll be perfect for your sheltered "angel" is a waste of time when you could just spend quality time with your kid and be a better parent. Read to them, be actively engaged in their school knowing what's difficult or easy for them, what their assignments are, with their grades are. Make sure they get enough sleep, stop giving them so much screen time. A teacher is only a teacher for a school year at a time, a parent is forever. Parents who chase the perfect school are probably just blaming their failure of a child on the schools instead of looking in the mirror. I mean come on, the schools aren't the ones who gave your kid an iPad when they were 3. The schools aren't the ones who let your kids be on the Wi-Fi until all hours of the night. The schools aren't the ones who purchased the video games with no care in the world for the ratings or appropriateness. Parents either don't know or don't care that their kids are up all night on technology and not getting sleep, but turn around and blame the schools even though their kids can barely stay awake all day. So yeah, shop around find a better school. I'm sure there's one out there, with only perfect teachers who only teach perfect students. Please post here when you find it!

You're not going to fix public schools by taking away resources, and we all benefit from good public schools - whether our kids go there or not.

Our previous governor in Arizona took $365m from public schools and gave it to charter schools because “they needed it.” Then he got a law passed that allowed vouchers for *private* schools. I’m furious but our very republican government supports this. I don’t even have (and never have had) children in school. Yet I pay taxes. The people who take their kids to private schools irritate me no end. You want your kids to get a better education? Then do everything you can to support the schools in your state.

They care about their children’s education.

I think the parents don't realize the behind the scenes issues that make charter and private schools a risky choice. At least in my area most charter schools have no union and teachers must buy their own health benefits and there is no pension.  This does not really attract the cream of the crop or people who are going to make education a career.  Second, charter and private schools are not bound by an IEP, so they don't have to offer those educational services. Third, charter schools don't have to follow a lot of the requirements public schools do for credentials.  The teachers don't have to fall under "highly qualified" standards that NCLB initiated. At the end of the day any school cam have amazing teachers or really crummy teachers. But there are some safeguards at public schools that may not be at a charter or private school.  It is really on the parent to do their due diligence to look into it.

This exactly. People do not realize that public schools are held accountable but charter and private are not

I used to be against private schools, but after 18 years working in public schools and watching the system and behaviors go steadily downhill, it becomes easier and easier for me to understand why parents of means don't want to subject their kids to that. It's naive to think that private schools are the only problem.

I can't blanket judge anyone... I've elected to move my kids to another school because there have been so many issues in their school. The leadership is the problem which means the fight is so, so hard. I can buy one problem but it became multiple teachers. Worked at another school, same thing. There was a mass exodus because of the leadership. I can't begrudge people wanting the best for their kids. The problem is too nuanced to apply a blanket judgement. We need to fix schools not just fix school for one kid or family.

School choice already exists. You already can put your child in private school or charter school, or homeschool them. "School choice" is a thinly veiled attempt from conservatives to defund and dismantle public education. Furthermore, the belief that all public schools are low quality is false. In reality, public schools are legally required to employ teachers who are actually certified to teach. Private schools can hire anyone. Public schools are also legally required to accommodate students with learning differences or who are English learners. Private schools can turn these students away or elect not to accommodate them. Public schools vary a LOT in quality, but the same is true of private schools. All the privileged students I have are doing just fine in public school. If their parents are involved and the kid makes an effort, they will be fine. They can always do outside programming over the summer or after school to supplement their education. If anything, students I have tutored and taught who experienced both private and public school on the whole tended to prefer public school for the diversity and social life. I think it better prepares them for the real world. If you shelter your child from any and all adversity and stick them in an environment that has only other sheltered, rich (and usually predominantly white) kids they aren't going to learn how to work with people from different backgrounds. If all the parents complaining about public school kept their kid in school and collaborated with the PTA to improve their school, the problem would evaporate. I've seen time and time again that schools with privileged, active parents who help with fundraising and take an active role in advocating for the kids as well as the school to the district have better outcomes. But a lot of schools in my district have "white flight" with wealthy parents electing to put their kids in private schools. This is modern day segregation and it will widen income and racial gaps in this country. I understand the desire to do what's best for your child, but ultimately, from what I have observed, sheltering your kid is not usually good for them in the long run and the negative perspective on public schools is overblown by politically motivated misinformation. Also, private schools have their own issues. No school is perfect. Each individual school or district should be judged by its own merits rather than assuming all private schools are superior to all public schools.

Why in the WORLD to you care what teachers think about school choice. No offense, but the WHOLE POINT of school choice is the "CHOICE" part is to give the power to the parents. That is the POINT of school choice.

I'm sympathetic to the parents whose kids are stuck in a crappy school, but the solution isn't to allow parents to divert funding away from struggling school systems. In all honesty the solutions would be to increase the tax revenue that's funneled towards schools, reduce the incidence of high stakes standardized testing and set up some better way of tying the salaries of administrators to the actual performance of their schools. I worked in NYC public schools for five years and the difference in quality of administrators can be stark. The first school I was at was a clown car of idiocy. We had a new principal who meant well but completely alienated most of the staff on his arrival and led to a mass exodus of highly qualified staff. The assistant principals were all varying degrees of useless. The head of special education didn't really know how to do anything other than critique your paperwork and IEPs to ensure the school didn't get sued, though ironically she was slated to co-teach an inclusion class and literally never once set foot in the classroom she was assigned to. The second school was better because the principal spent a lot of time working on getting grant money and funding/support for the school which was helpful, but she also still made things far, far harder than they needed to be. I was part of a committee asked to come up with a solution for a huge problem with chronic lateness. We met and determined the real issue was that other than simply having to sign in as late and get a pass from the front office there was no actual disincentive to showing up late. We proposed allowing students to go outside the building for their lunch so long as they were on time that day, but were told by admin that "we hadn't sufficiently analyzed the problem." They gave us several "discussion protocols" that were intended to help "analyze the issue" and surprise surprise, we came up with the exact same answer after following all their goofy procedures, mostly because determining the motivations of a bunch of teenagers really isn't that hard. After being pushed back over and over on this issue we finally got the administration to cave and let us roll out our planned program. Lateness dropped from having 30-50% of the student body arriving late 2-3 times a week to maybe 5% overall with zero money spent.

Primarily I think there needs to be an overhaul of the education system in general. There's little if any regulation of home schooling, or God forbid those "unschooling" wackos. Charter schools are run like a for profit buisness and not an educational institution. The federal guidelines on education means you can get a wildly different education state by state. Many admins are beurocrats who don't know what it's like to teach. Teachers are underpaid and under protected. Parents aren't parenting or even teaching their kids basic manners or respect. And none of that is to mention that kids are seeing how very little school gets you nowadays. They aren't blind, they are well aware you can have a masters degree and still be homeless. They know that student loans are designed to gatekeep education and keep people impoverished. They've watched the American dream die and rot, and they don't see any reason to try for it. The system is broken, choice doesn't matter.

Most of Milwaukee's public school teachers choose private schools for their own kids. Pretty telling. Shame poor kids can't.

I think all funding should go to the school the student is assigned to (their home public school) if parents choose to pay for private or charters choose to run off private donations, fine. But public funds should stay in public schools. Parents can do whatever they want with their child.

There is a big difference between school choice and school vouchers. I’m not a huge fan of school choice, but, I don’t fight it because public dollars stay in public schools. Although it’s still highly problematic as outlined by others. What I take huge issue with is vouchers. Because that takes public dollars and gives them to private schools and even in some places a family who homeschools, but does not place any of the testing or requirements tied to public funds given to public schools. And private schools have the ability to select their students. And vouchers typically make the rich richer. They go to families who already send their kid to private school, and the voucher never covers all of the tuition. public education does need to be reformed, but removing funding from a school isn’t the way do it.

I think they don’t know what they don’t know. Fuck charter schools, seriously, but if I were a parent looking for one for my kid, I’d demand to know teacher turnover

I’ll say. My uncle and aunt wanted the best for their kids. So, they moved to make sure they were always in some of the best school districts/schools always. One kid was accepted to Harvard, the other Yale, and both declined them and went elsewhere. They just made sure they were in the best schools possible. If they had the choice to not move, and choose the schools for them, they would have done that. Easily. The idea behind school choice is great. I want my kid to go to this school instead of that one. It’s being touted as money going to private schools and such. That is happening, of course. But, shouldn’t schools compete to be better, to make it so parents want their kids to go there instead? Right now, there is no reason to be better.

Except when the 'competition' you are referring to is the competition of who is best at bypassing the law in order to exclude the most problematic students. If private schools had to follow all the requirements of public schools (providing transportation, servicing ieps and sped student accommodations, ell programs, disciplinary policies, transparency laws) then we might be able to actually have a valid discussion concerning competition. But as it turns out, you can't have competition when selection bias is such a powerful force in the field.

I've taught special education at public schools, reservation schools, and am currently at a charter school. I've been with my current school for 6 years and have no intention of leaving. I'm in Arizona, which was one of the original birth places of school choice so I've seen it evolve over the past 2 decades. First, you need to separate charter and private schools. Private schools are private and absolutely do not have to follow federal law as they do not receive federal funding. Vouchers being used to pay for private schooling is a completely separate issue. Second, charter schools are public schools. They receive federal funds and have to follow federal laws. As a special education teacher, I follow the same law that regulates special education in the public schools. I use the same IEP system. The "they can kick out anyone they want" crowd is full of bs and has no idea what they're talking about. It's actually usually the opposite. We get the kids who have struggled in public schools and could never get the support they needed to succeed and we are literally their parents last hope. We don't use seclusion rooms and while we do have a team trained in restraints, I've never had to restrain a student in my 6 years at my current campus. We get students who were restrained or placed in seclusion rooms multiple times a week at their public school previously, as young as 5 years old. It's wild. In general, I'm not against school choice. But I can acknowledge it benefits those who already have resources and can provide opportunities to their children. My school doesn't provide transportation so the majority of students are dropped off by parents. That's already a hindrance for many families. We participate in the free/reduced lunch program but many charters don't. Again, that can be an issue for low SES families. Arizona perpetuates this though by partially funding public schools through local property taxes. Low property taxes means low funding for the neighborhood school. If they really wanted to fund education and make it priority, then they'd find a way to fund it so there's more equity. Until they're willing to do that, I'm going to teach at and put my kids in schools that best support our needs. P.S. As a charter school teacher, I make more than my local public school teachers. I'm also paid for all my extra time. I'm working over the summer, doing some paperwork stuff to get ready for our upcoming state audit and my principal is paying me to do so. Also, my benefits are phenomenal and much more affordable.

That they are not aware of what public school actually entails. They are probably White, middle/upper class Christian republicans. They have no idea that school choice is still not an equal opportunity like they think it is.

To be fair, if their kid comes home complaining that Johnny threw a chair at the teacher for the third time this week, or refuse to do homework because they know they'll be passed anyways, I can see why parents would think little of public schools.

And then that parent needs to speak up. Things don’t change unless people speak up. The laziness of people astounds me.

Most people don’t come to social media to share wonderful things. They’re looking to vent with, support, and be supported by people who share their struggle. So the posts you’re reading are naturally skewed towards the negative. You don’t say that your children have experienced anything negative themselves, only that you’ve ‘read posts.’ My advice is to stop reading posts online. Instead, visit the public school your children will attend. Talk to teachers, visit with administrators, ask whatever questions are troubling you. You don’t seem to understand how the funding piece affects children, so maybe do some research on that. It also doesn’t seem that you know much about how charter schools are run, so you might check that out. Get as complete an understanding of the education system in general as you can. Schools are a reflection of their communities. Within any student population, at any type of school, there are children with special needs—be they behavioral, emotional, or academic. And public school teachers are required to have the specialized training and skills to support ALL students in their classes. In 26 years of teaching in a general education classroom, I only once had a student who required a reassessment of placement due to behavioral issues. My children went to public schools for a total of 24 years, and never experienced a single classroom with an out-of-control or aggressive classmate. I’m not saying it doesn’t happen. But it’s certainly not the norm. Your post reads like you’re trying to manufacture trouble that doesn’t exist. How much support your local school is given is a direct reflection of how people in your community value their neighbors. If you’re concerned about policies, then get involved! Volunteer. Join the PTA. VOTE for people who care about educating all children—including the disabled and those in poverty. Because some day your kids will live and work alongside people from many walks of life, most of whom will have attended public schools. You have a vested interest in ensuring those schools are the best they can be, even if you decide to send your children elsewhere.

When violence has gotten so prevalent in these urban public schools, can you blame parents for wanting to move their children to a safer, more educationally focused setting?

It's difficult. Where I live, parents who want their kids to get a good education have moved to suburban districts. The schools in the suburbs actually do not spend as much per pupil as the city schools, but they have none of the discipline issues, none of the violence, and nowhere near the amount of social promotion. The test score differences are astonishing: something like 95% of suburban students at reading proficiency, and 20% of city students. And again, the city schools have more money per pupil, so that ain't it. But if you live nowhere near a good district you can move to, or if you can't afford to move there, that ties your hands a bit. Parochial schools do charge tuition, but they also have lots of scholarships so poor kids can go there. Home schooling is another option. I just know I would NOT send my kids to the city schools in my little corner of the world. Too violent. Too disruptive. Very little education going on. And the good teachers leave for districts where they can actually teach.

I don't understand why school choice is a bad thing. You should have the right to choose where your child goes to school and not have to pay extra. Prior to Trump's policy, poor families had no other options for alternative schooling it was limited only to the rich. Who would be most upset by these policies? The rich. They do not want our poor kids socializing with their trust fund babies.

Depends on the details. If the non public schools have to take students with IEPs and 504s at no extra cost and are subject to standardized testing, I am OK with it. Otherwise students miss out on important lessons on tolerance and acceptance.

I agree with the standardized testing, and the IEPs/504s as long as those students aren't being disruptive. It's completely unfair to force a school to accept a student that frequently disrupts class or picks fights with other students as that harms everybody else's education.

It is a myth that students with IEPs and 504s all have behavior issues. The vast majority do not.

I never said all students with IEPs have behavior issues. I just said schools should be allowed to remove the ones who do.

Then why bring it up? So they can remove disruptive student with IEPs and no one else? You associating the two is pretty telling.

>Then why bring it up? So they can remove disruptive student with IEPs and no one else? Schools already can and do remove disruptive kids without IEPs. That's a given. That's why I brought up the disruptive kids with IEP's, since it seems that only private and charter schools can remove them.

I removed kids with IEPs in public school all of the time, I have no idea what you are talking about. There is a small subset of students that require a manifestation meeting to remove, that is it. It is hard to remove any student from public schools, whether they are disabled is hardly a factor.

Charters and private schools are not held to the same standards in my state. They take funding directly away from public schools who need it and then can manipulate their data however they’d like. They regularly kick out any kid who isn’t their ideal student. We get them back in our public schools all the time. It’s disruptive and completely against why I got into teaching. There’s currently a bill in my state to force them to do the steps required by public schools for state report cards, like state testing. I really hope it passes. If they’re getting state money, they should absolutely be held to the same standards that our public schools are.  Also, the things you stated in your OP is a gross exaggeration of what happens in most public schools. I currently work for an urban district, the biggest one in the state. We have well over 100 schools, and only a handful of them have some extreme issues. I was in ten of them this year, and I only saw student fights in one of them. No teacher assaults. 

>They regularly kick out any kid who isn’t their ideal student. If it's due to behavior issues, I think it's fine to kick them out. If it's due to having a C average, then that is wrong. >Also, the things you stated in your OP is a gross exaggeration of what happens in most public schools. Ok, but in the public schools where these are issues, parents should be able to send their kids to a better learning environment.

They kick them out for many, many reasons, but it’s always a kid who needs extra support whether it’s for a disability, learning issue, etc… doesn’t matter. They do not support kids’ actual needs. But they take money away from the public schools who need it to provide the necessary support system.  I have no issue with parents choosing to send their kids to a private school. I myself attended both public and private. My issue is that it takes money directly away from public schools and puts them into private schools, where there has previously been a hard line of separation. Then, they aren’t held to any of the same standards that public schools are. They receive no evaluation or report. ALL public money should stay public. They should not rely on the public schools for ANYTHING. That’s how it was when I attended my Catholic school and that’s how it should have stayed. 

Most parents are terrible and don't know a thing. They didn't care about their education, so we will be getting school choice in every red state. Current Scotus says it's fine even though it's tax dollars funding religion.  ETA: Private school do not have better outcomes. They are better at recruiting high performers and ditching low performers. Read to your kids. Read to your kids. Read to your kids. 

“School choice” are weasel words, like “virtually spotless” or “right to work.” What “school choice” does is give vouchers to people who were going to pay for private schools anyway. And it takes that money away from public schools. I have seen first hand how bad it is. Schools in poorer areas have to tape up broken chairs and use them; teachers have to spend their own money on necessary classroom supplies; if a kid breaks something, it can’t be replaced. A/C not working? Hope you like June days with 85-90 degree temperatures in your classroom. Copy paper? You get ONE box for the whole school year; after that you’re on your own. And this was in a school that shares a district with several affluent areas. I guarantee that the schools in those wealthier parts of the district got everything THEY needed. We need to stop draining funds to public schools, because “school choice” has no effect on well-off families, but it is BRUTALLY hard on poor kids, who already had the deck stacked against them. How am I supposed to help these kids if I don’t get basic supplies? ETA: I have since moved to a blue state. The difference between what I can expect the school to cover is night and day—and I’m still teaching in a Title I school!