Give parents a choice

I'm tired of parents having to pay for public schools when they elect not to use them. A United States citizen, living in a free nation, whouldn't be forced to support something they're not using. They should be given their money back, and allowed to use it on a school of their choice.

This is why I support vouchers.

My children attend Heritage Hall, yet I still have to pay for their tuition to public school. What a rip off.

I can see where you're coming from, but would it really be in everyone's best interest for the public school system as we now know it to cease to exist? I don't think so. Part of the freedoms of living in this nation are that everyone has an opportunity to an education.

[Easy180]

Agree with Patrick...It's in the best interest of society as a whole to provide public school systems to those who cannot afford private school tuition

May not be fair to those that can afford to send their kids to HH, but it's better for the other 95%

[mranderson]

Originally Posted by Conservative

I'm tired of parents having to pay for public schools when they elect not to use them. A United States citizen, living in a free nation, whouldn't be forced to support something they're not using. They should be given their money back, and allowed to use it on a school of their choice.

This is why I support vouchers.

My children attend Heritage Hall, yet I still have to pay for their tuition to public school. What a rip off.

You are a TAX PAYING CITIZEN. So, as such, it is your civic duty and obligation to pay for services, regardless of use or non use. If you can not accept that, then I suggest moving to Iraq.

[bandnerd]

I don't have children, and my taxes go to OKCPS. I'd rather the taxes go somewhere else, or have them back, but I don't have a better solution, either.

Originally Posted by bandnerd

my taxes go to OKCPS. I'd rather the taxes go somewhere else, or have them back, but I don't have a better solution, either.

That's exactly how I feel.

[bandnerd]

Maybe if I felt my tax dollars were being used in a more efficient way, I'd feel better about giving to OKCPS! But I don't really trust the district, after what I've seen them do to their students. I have to wonder where that money goes.

Maybe my feelings of mistrust just stem from my employment at a charter.

Originally Posted by bandnerd

Maybe if I felt my tax dollars were being used in a more efficient way, I'd feel better about giving to OKCPS! But I don't really trust the district, after what I've seen them do to their students. I have to wonder where that money goes.

Maybe my feelings of mistrust just stem from my employment at a charter.

That's my main complaint with the current system. We're only giving more money to a broken system, but we're not fixing the system. Sandy Garrett and other people involved in school administration at all levels need to be held accountable. Before we give more money to the system, we need to make sure every dollar is accounted for, and is being spent in an appropriate manner. Meacham has attempted to uncover misused money through audits, but I think we need to go further, and have an in depth investigation into how the state's education fund is being handled.

Although I do vote Republican often, I favor Meacham, and would strongly consider him as a candidate for governor in 2010.

[Midtowner]

Originally Posted by Conservative

That's my main complaint with the current system. We're only giving more money to a broken system, but we're not fixing the system. Sandy Garrett and other people involved in school administration at all levels need to be held accountable. Before we give more money to the system, we need to make sure every dollar is accounted for, and is being spent in an appropriate manner. Meacham has attempted to uncover misused money through audits, but I think we need to go further, and have an in depth investigation into how the state's education fund is being handled.

Although I do vote Republican often, I favor Meacham, and would strongly consider him as a candidate for governor in 2010.

Part of our problem is the fact that we have 541 school districts -- that's 541 superintendants and 541 sets of administrations. The vast majority of these are in charge of very small schools when there are other very small schools within 5 miles all of which could be and should be consolidated.

This is an emotional subject, but small town folks are too terrified of losing their town's identity if they were to loose that 8-man football team.

I think a lot of savings could be realized in consolidating facilities and administrative staffs.

As far as what's wrong with education itself? For one thing, teachers and principals aren't really being held accountable for the kids they produce. On the other hand, neither are parents. Perhaps we ought to start fining parents of children who don't pass their end of instruction exams?

I'm sure the governor has a task force looking at this, but I am doubtful of his ability/willingness to implement the kind of bold initiatives which need to be undertaken.

Originally Posted by Midtowner

Part of our problem is the fact that we have 541 school districts -- that's 541 superintendants and 541 sets of administrations. The vast majority of these are in charge of very small schools when there are other very small schools within 5 miles all of which could be and should be consolidated.

This is an emotional subject, but small town folks are too terrified of losing their town's identity if they were to loose that 8-man football team.

I think a lot of savings could be realized in consolidating facilities and administrative staffs.

As far as what's wrong with education itself? For one thing, teachers and principals aren't really being held accountable for the kids they produce. On the other hand, neither are parents. Perhaps we ought to start fining parents of children who don't pass their end of instruction exams?

I'm sure the governor has a task force looking at this, but I am doubtful of his ability/willingness to implement the kind of bold initiatives which need to be undertaken.

We for starters, you could keep the schools open, but cut the administrative faculty. Do we really need a superintendent each for Hinton, Binger, and Ft. Cobb? Couldn't one person cover all 3 districts? And one set of office staff, instead of 3 sets?

Run it more as one district with several regional schools, instead one several school districts. The schools under the umbrella of the OKCPS District seem to be able maintain their unique identities.

And why does Millwood need to be a separate district? Can't they merge with OKCPS?

What about Western Heights merging with PC? Mustang merging with Yukon: keeping separate schools but one administration.

[Midtowner]

Originally Posted by Conservative

We for starters, you could keep the schools open, but cut the administrative faculty. Do we really need a superintendent each for Hinton, Binger, and Ft. Cobb? Couldn't one person cover all 3 districts? And one set of office staff, instead of 3 sets?

Run it more as one district with several regional schools, instead one several school districts. The schools under the umbrella of the OKCPS District seem to be able maintain their unique identities.

And why does Millwood need to be a separate district? Can't they merge with OKCPS?

What about Western Heights merging with PC? Mustang merging with Yukon: keeping separate schools but one administration.

I agree completely. I'd like to see legislation defining the minimum size for a school district as either having x number of students, or having x geographical size.

We can cut administrations, but it would also be very cost effective to close a lot of these po-dunk high schools. Especially out in eastern Oklahoma where schools and their districts are as little as 5 miles apart. Close two or three different districts and facilities and we could merge them into one centralized facility offering a better educational opportunity for the kids and a more cost-effective solution for the taxpayers.

I think the biggest problem is that rural folks have a huge sense of entitlement when it comes to these things. Our legislature is largely composed of rural-interest politicians (like Todd Hiett) who would never let this conservative, common-sense legislation pass.

No one can justify to me 541 school districts in a state this size. Arizona has 18 and a higher population than we do. I don't think we could scale back to 18, but 100? 150? Completely possible.

Originally Posted by Midtowner

(like Todd Hiett)

Hiett actually opposed the measure we're referring to. Strange that he calls himself a Republican Conservative. What a joke!

[Midtowner]

Originally Posted by Conservative

Hiett actually opposed the measure we're referring to. Strange that he calls himself a Republican Conservative. What a joke!

This is principally why a lot of real conservatives such as myself are voting for Askins. She may be liberal, but at least she's honest. The Lieutenant Governor's office doesn't really allow too much for one to be liberal or conservative (it doesn't really matter). Honesty and integrity are far more important there.

I also don't think Askins is interested in the job as a stepping stone to run for higher office -- on the other hand, that's the only reason Hiett is running.

[windowphobe]

That and the fact that otherwise he'd have to get a real job, inasmuch as his time in the Legislature has expired.

[Luke]

Florida has a superintendent for each county. That might be a model we should follow.

[Midtowner]

Originally Posted by windowphobe

That and the fact that otherwise he'd have to get a real job, inasmuch as his time in the Legislature has expired.

His website says he's a farmer.

[Spartan]

Originally Posted by Conservative

Hiett actually opposed the measure we're referring to. Strange that he calls himself a Republican Conservative. What a joke!

I believe Todd Hiett's concerns were more practical. He said he supports more choices for parents, but he doesn’t support vouchers because of concerns about how private education would be affected if government intruded.

[Midtowner]

Private schools would be free to turn vouchers away.

Hiett is an idiot, or at least he thinks the voters are.

[Spartan]

So you acknowledge that government would probably interfere?

[Midtowner]

Sure. I don't think it'd be in a bad way though. I expect charter schools would have to comply with things like No Child Left Behind.

We basically already have a limited system of school vouchers in our charter school system.

[bandnerd]

Yes, we have to comply with NCLB.

Hiett isn't a true conservative. Any true conservative would want our state government to save money by consolidating school districts. As Midtowner said, the guy is an idiot.

[Spartan]

Midtowner I would rather private schools be free from the tentacular hold of All Children Left Behind.

[Midtowner]

Spartan, no one says they have to take the vouchers. Go read up on the program. It's not a bad idea.

[Spartan]

You are missing my point or I have not made it good enough.

Any voucher you get, or any school that will accept your voucher, won't be any differant from public schools. Same "No Child Left Behind", same testing crap, same stupid PC environment, same this, same that.

It would be counterintuitive to an extremely large extent. The only reward you the taxpayer get from cashing your voucher in elsewhere is a more selective school that will pass your child just for the heck of it, and the prestige that comes with a private school. But that prestige, should the school accept vouchers and sell out to the government, would mean nothing anymore anyway.

Read up on that. It is a bad idea.