Private School Voucher Expansion Could Hurt Public School Funding in Ohio

 

The education community in Ohio is encouraged by the governor’s support of public school funding, but see red flags when it comes to increased private school vouchers, warning that they hinder Ohio’s Full School Funding Plan.

 

Gov. Mike DeWine’s announced his planned budget asks last Wednesday during his State of the State address, including boosts to literacy programs, a $2,500 per child state tax deduction, and promotion of public school funding reform.

 

After DeWine’s speech, Senate President Matt Huffman spoke highly of the governor’s plans, though he believes the education overhaul Republicans have planned in Senate Bill 1 would implement plans faster.

 

More below:

https://columbusunderground.com/private-school-voucher-expansion-could-hurt-public-school-funding-in-ohio-ocj1/

 

Ohio Board of Education Members Vote No on Overhaul

 

Three members of the Ohio State Board of Education publicly opposed an overhaul of the state education system last Tuesday.

 

The members were among dozens of people asking the Ohio Senate’s Education Committee to rethink Senate Bill 1, a bill to rename and restructure the Ohio Department of Education, and reduce the role of the state board of ed.

 

Board member Michelle Newman said the bill would lead to a new cabinet-level position with “no direct accountability to districts, families or voters.”

 

“The people of Ohio put the State Board of Education in place to ensure there was a level of oversight and accountability and to provide a stage for public feedback in both the rules and policymaking process,” Newman said. “SB 1 does none of this.”

 

Responding to claims from legislators and the sponsor of the bill, state Sen. Bill Reineke, R-Tiffin, that the ODE has lacked accountability and accessibility, Newman said she traveled her district and asked superintendents and other members of the school community if they’d had problems reaching the ODE.

 

“The answer is a resounding no,” Newman told the committee. “Direct feedback over a period of two years shows that schools hear back timely from the department – not always with the answers they want to hear but with prudence and thoughtfulness.”

 

More below:

https://columbusunderground.com/ohio-board-of-education-members-vote-no-on-overhaul-ocj1/

 

So I wrote this a little over half a year ago regarding the then-pending "Backpack Bill," which read as a two-page publicity stunt or expression of principle, not a serious legislative proposal:

 

On 8/24/2022 at 12:51 PM, Gramarye said:

 

What's the difference between this and the existing EdChoice voucher program?

 

And is this 2-page run-on sentence of platitudinous gobbledegook really the entire draft of the bill?  That's the link from the announcement on the CCV homepage.

 

I think this is a nothingburger announcement until there's more meat on these bones.  And I say this as someone (see upthread) who is fully behind universal vouchers in principle.

 

I came across this article today noting that the Backpack Bill is probably going to get swept aside, in this case because there's a much more fleshed-out proposal with similar effects, which is the recently-introduced Parent Education Freedom Act, SB 11:

 

Backpack bill likely casualty in Columbus

 

https://www.morningjournalnews.com/opinion/columns/2023/01/backpack-bill-likely-casualty-in-columbus/

 

Legislation sponsored by state Sen. Sandra O’Brien, whose district includes all of Trumbull County, would make significant changes to school funding by providing public dollars for students to attend private schools.

 

While it’s probable the bill eventually will pass in the state Senate, it faces a much greater challenge in the Ohio House.

 

Republicans have supermajorities in both legislative bodies, but are having an internal fight in the House. A companion bill to O’Brien’s Parent Education Freedom Act — also known as the backpack bill — is a likely casualty. That companion bill was introduced almost a year ago in the House and never made it to the floor for a vote.

 

State Rep. Derek Merrin, R-Monclova, was going to be the next House speaker until state Rep. Jason Stephens, R-Kitts Hill, and his backers cut a deal with House Democrats to get their votes. The plan worked with Stephens elected speaker 54-43 with the 32 House Democrats joining 22 Republicans supporting him.

 

There are still a lot of tension between the supporters of Merrin and Stephens that are not going away.

 

While Democratic leadership said nothing was promised from Stephens for their support, it is strongly believed the speaker won’t consider legislation to totally ban abortions or to support the anti-union right-to-work bill or the backpack bill.

 

Merrin would have gone in the other direction had he been elected speaker.

 

======================

 

The sponsoring state legislator's op-ed in favor of her bill is here, and of interest, she's apparently a former public school teacher: https://www.tribtoday.com/opinion/guest-columnists/2023/03/allow-ohio-tax-dollars-to-follow-all-students/

 

======================

 

This bill was still just introduced in committee and may simply turn out to have a prohibitive price tag.  That said, I think this EdChoice-for-all proposal has at least some heft and momentum that the older Backpack Bill did not.  The reason for that is that I didn't just stumble on these links.  Multiple Catholic schools in the Diocese of Cleveland have sent out similar communications in favor of this new bill (which never happened with that skeletal previous one), suggesting that there's a substantially broader attempt to mobilize support for this version.

 

This combined with the already-enacted Scholarship-Granting Organizations tax credit could substantially reform Ohio school funding (I think I heard recently that the Angel Scholarship Fund, which is the SGO for the Diocese of Cleveland, took in more than $4 million donations in 2022, not too bad but a long way from the $20M/yr frequently raised by the Diocese of Phoenix under the Arizona law that Ohio emulated).  I used to think it was a pipe dream to get true universal school choice; we're still a long way from that but we've come farther than I expected and we might well be on the verge of something really transformative.  I used to think you could never even get the suburban votes you'd need for a measure like this, and maybe that will still prove to be the case.  They paid premium prices for real estate that would let them escape the dysfunction of inner-city schools (even long before Akron had its most recent 15 minutes of infamy), and presumably wouldn't want tax dollars going to a program that might make it less necessary for the next family to have to do likewise.

Not surprising at all

 

 

Just a reminder when the state legislature proposed stiffening the requirements to pass public led amendments last year, they said it was to block outside influence and "special interests." The fact is they have no issue with lobbying and special interests, just as long as it's theirinterests. This and other recent legislation (not constitutional amendments mind you, but still) was in lock step with other states, likely written by PACs and lobbyists. 

On 3/18/2023 at 4:25 PM, KJP said:

Not surprising at all

 

Agreed, not surprising.  Whether that's a bad thing is of course rather a different question.

 

But yes, this is about as surprising as a bill to do precisely the opposite would be written with similar help from teachers' unions.  Or are those somehow not "special interests?"

15 minutes ago, Gramarye said:

 

Agreed, not surprising.  Whether that's a bad thing is of course rather a different question.

 

But yes, this is about as surprising as a bill to do precisely the opposite would be written with similar help from teachers' unions.  Or are those somehow not "special interests?"

 

I would argue that diverting public money to fund private schools that push specific religious doctrine (and of course they will, or Christian lobbyists wouldn't even be involved) is objectively bad in quite a few different ways. 

10 hours ago, jonoh81 said:

 

I would argue that diverting public money to fund private schools that push specific religious doctrine (and of course they will, or Christian lobbyists wouldn't even be involved) is objectively bad in quite a few different ways. 

That is not changing and has been settled standard in Ohio for close to 70 years now. Your tax dollars pay for textbooks at private and Catholic (as well as other religious sects) schools, they provide auxiliary learning like reading specialists, guidance counselors, speech therapists at those schools, and they also bus children to private religious schools. Those are all reasonable and have been established for a long time now so to argue that that should change is really unrealistic. 

 

The debate on if school vouchers should be expanded  is certainly a debatable matter. I personally think it is a good thing and better for all the children involved but certainly that point is open for discussion. However, regarding funding private schools with taxpayer funds for religious schools, that ship has sailed a long time ago and it really is not changing or worth debate.  

1 hour ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

The debate on if school vouchers should be expanded  is certainly a debatable matter. I personally think it is a good thing and better for all the children involved but certainly that point is open for discussion. However, regarding funding private schools with taxpayer funds for religious schools, that ship has sailed a long time ago and it really is not changing or worth debate.  

A lot of "settled" law has changed over time.  70 years is a fraction of the time the country allowed slavery, for example.  Roe v. Wade lasted for 50 years.  We absolutely should reconsider past actions and evaluate whether past actions were the best course of action.  Whether and how we fund private schools should always be worthy of debate -- all public spending should be debated.

 

Where do you draw the line on what public money can be used for?  Should the state fund Nazi homeschooling?  https://www.wtol.com/article/news/local/state-homeschool-regulations-questioned-after-upper-sandusky-couple-accused-of-teaching-nazi-ideology/512-d85499ba-3aad-4f70-8d3f-05032ad4b699 (As long as parents consent, can schools teach kids to hate Jews?)

What about teaching LGBT kids that they are damned -- I assume that's ok, right?  Catholic schools are all over that one. 

 

Granted, the current political party in power gushes over religious schools and sending government money to private interests (in return for campaign contributions from for-profit schools or highly paid "nonprofit" executives), so you're right that this is unlikely to change.  And despite repeated Court decisions saying that the state funding model for public schools is inadequate, that won't stop the state executive and legislative branches from ignoring the Courts.

 

But a bigger problem for the backpack bill or vouchers-for-everyone bill is cost, which runs up against the Republican plan to cut more taxes, particularly for the wealthy.  I just don't see where the state gets the money to adequately fund both public and private schools. 

 

Nevertheless, I predict that the courts are going to say that funding for public schools must be at least as great as the funding for private schools. And the state legislature will continue to increase funding for private schools and cut state funding for public schools until the public school system collapses and Ohio's academic achievement rate looks a lot more like Alabama's than Massachusetts's.  And Republicans will claim that that will bring the Fortune 100 running to Ohio like never before.  Rinse and repeat.

27 minutes ago, Foraker said:

Where do you draw the line on what public money can be used for?  Should the state fund Nazi homeschooling?  https://www.wtol.com/article/news/local/state-homeschool-regulations-questioned-after-upper-sandusky-couple-accused-of-teaching-nazi-ideology/512-d85499ba-3aad-4f70-8d3f-05032ad4b699 (As long as parents consent, can schools teach kids to hate Jews?)

What about teaching LGBT kids that they are damned -- I assume that's ok, right?  Catholic schools are all over that one.

So you think that all schools should teach the same things and there should be 1 education czar that issues edicts on how and when and what type of material children are taught.  Sounds a lot like the Nazi indoctrination system if you ask me.

 

Maybe it is worth recognizing that there is diversity of thought in this country and that people have different goals and reasons for educating their children and want them educated in certain environments. Public schools are not for everyone. Those taxpayers should at least be able to benefit from some of their education tax dollars going back to their children. Also, those parents have a right to raise their children in the environment they feel is appropriate for them. They do not have to follow the Nazi educational system the teachers unions want to propagate. 

 

I get it. I think it is odd for parents who want to home school. I personally think they do their kids a dis-service socially. But they are not my kids and it is not for me to decide how to educate THEIR children.  I send my kids to Catholic school for a variety of reasons and have been very happy with that choice. My wife grew up the daughter of a public school teacher who was a proud teachers union member so I understand that perspective too. 

It is certainly a dynamic matter and not something that can be painted in black and white like many in the teachers unions want to do or those on the far right. However, I truly believe we are always better when we allow for a diversity of thought and differing perspectives and better as a society for allowing this, even when I disagree with the thoughts and viewpoints being advocated by some parties. 

 

37 minutes ago, Foraker said:

A lot of "settled" law has changed over time.  70 years is a fraction of the time the country allowed slavery, for example.  Roe v. Wade lasted for 50 years.  We absolutely should reconsider past actions and evaluate whether past actions were the best course of action.  Whether and how we fund private schools should always be worthy of debate -- all public spending should be debated.

If you look at education cases and how they are handled, especially when it comes to religion, the direction of the court (even before the 6-3 conservative majority) has been to default toward allowance of exercise of religion. This is pretty much ingrained in most jurisprudence over the last century and individual liberty in general is taking a bigger place in court thought.  While this is a state matter and other states handle funding for private and religious schools a bit differently, it should be noted that the default position nationally has moved more toward the individual liberty position in education matters. 

If I don't take the public transportation in Cincinnati, should I get a rebate on my sales taxes to spend on a parking garage I do use?

 

If I don't have children, should I get my school property taxes back entirely? After all, it's my contribution, I should be able to determine where it goes.

 

If I decide I would rather go to the Columbus Zoo instead of the Cincinnati Zoo, should I get to shift my property tax contributions to Columbus?

 

Why should you get to shift your tax contribution to a private school and take that money away from public schools?

 

I understand you might want to send your kids to a religious school, or a private school. But we shouldn't in any way take money away from public schools to give them to private schools. 

6 minutes ago, ryanlammi said:

Why should you get to shift your tax contribution to a private school and take that money away from public schools?

 

I understand you might want to send your kids to a religious school, or a private school. But we shouldn't in any way take money away from public schools to give them to private schools. 

Because 1) The legislature has decided such a number of years ago 2) The Ohio Courts have decided such going back all the way to the 1950s, 3) The US Supreme Court has essentially given their blessing to it going back to many of their cases for much of the last 60 years. 

 

So while I understand your argument, it pretty much falls flat under established law and precedent. 

The only reason you're using "precedent" as your defense is because you like the precedent. It's not about your belief in the precedent as good law, it's that you like the direct benefit it gives you.

There's a precedent of private fire departments in Cincinnati too

1 hour ago, Foraker said:

I just don't see where the state gets the money to adequately fund both public and private schools. 

 

If private schools and Catholic schools disappeared, the public schools would have to expand.  This means property taxes and school spending are significantly lower under the current setup than they would be otherwise.  Parents who send their kids to private and Catholic schools do not get a cut on the property taxes that fund schools their kids don't attend.     

34 minutes ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

So you think that all schools should teach the same things and there should be 1 education czar that issues edicts on how and when and what type of material children are taught. 

No. I am not in favor of a standard universal education model.  I do favor diversity in thought, but I also don't think public money should be used to teach kids that different kids are horrible people. 

 

I don't think that public dollars should go to private schools, religious or otherwise.  If you want to send your kids to a private school or homeschool them, fine -- but the state shouldn't be subsidizing that choice.  I recognize that for now I've lost that argument. 

 

But I am worried that opening the door to spending public money on non-public schools means funding schools that a lot of people would have problems with -- we won't be able to deny funding to the China communist school or the Nazi school or the Muslim madrassas that only teach the Koran.  I doubt that is the kind of diversity of thought you have in mind.  Sending public money to private schools opens that pandora's box and I don't see how you can restrict who can get the money.

 

I do not want the state dictating as much as they do.  The "minimum standards" that the state should be setting seem to have morphed into "college ready" standards that aren't appropriate for every student and really restrict opportunities for the diversity you've advocated for.  

 

 

More importantly at this point, if we're going to spend public money on private schools and/or allow the public money to follow the student, the requirements -- the strings attached to those dollars -- should be the same for everyone.  And if one of those strings says "you can't get an Ohio diploma without passing this state test" or "you have to bus students who live more than a mile from your school building" -- that should apply to all students and all schools, public or private.  If you don't like the strings, don't take the money.  Then you're free to do whatever you want.

 

 

2 minutes ago, Lazarus said:

 

If private schools and Catholic schools disappeared, the public schools would have to expand.  This means property taxes and school spending are significantly lower under the current setup than they would be otherwise.  Parents who send their kids to private and Catholic schools do not get a cut on the property taxes that fund schools their kids don't attend.     

First, private schools are not going away, so this is all theoretical.  Second, maybe public schools would have to expand, but it's not so simple.  If you add ten kids to a class of 20, you don't add a classroom or a teacher. 

 

Finally, we all pay a lot of taxes that go to things we don't want to support. 

 

When it comes to schools, we all pay, whether we have kids or not, to educate the kids in our society.  Whether they come from a good family or a bad family they don't get a choice, and a good education can change a kid's life for the better and a bad education can make that kid a drag on society for the rest of their life. 

 

Yes, if you send your kid to a private school, your property taxes are not going to lower your cost to give your kid a different option.  But your property taxes are going to educate a kid who might not have have a family behind him who cares as much as you do, and if that kid gets a good education it's more likely that that kid doesn't turn into a future carjacker or an embezzler of your retirement savings.

 

We shouldn't be funding schools with property taxes in Ohio.  A low property tax rate in Hudson can mean tons of money for the schools, and a high tax rate in East Cleveland, which needs the money more, might not generate enough tax dollars.  A kid's education should not be so dependent on where they live.

1 minute ago, Foraker said:

We shouldn't be funding schools with property taxes in Ohio.  A low property tax rate in Hudson can mean tons of money for the schools, and a high tax rate in East Cleveland, which needs the money more, might not generate enough tax dollars.  A kid's education should not be so dependent on where they live.

 

Oh boy the old $ thing.  Parents and family environment matter much more than how much $ the schools spend per student.  

 

 

The fact that a single religion is so intertwined into our government and public schools is such a shame for our country at a federal and state level. 

1 hour ago, ryanlammi said:

The only reason you're using "precedent" as your defense is because you like the precedent. It's not about your belief in the precedent as good law, it's that you like the direct benefit it gives you.

It is good law though. It is good law because the majority of courts across the country have recognized it as such. If it were bad law, it would merely be a compelling legal theory that does not have the strength or basis of years of legal precedent at the highest levels. So to argue it is not "Good Law" is merely your preference that you do not like the Law and precedence that exists. It is ultimately, you saying you do not like the First Amendment and that it is not "good Law" in your opinion when there are viewpoints that you dislike.

1 hour ago, Foraker said:

But I am worried that opening the door to spending public money on non-public schools means funding schools that a lot of people would have problems with -- we won't be able to deny funding to the China communist school or the Nazi school or the Muslim madrassas that only teach the Koran.  I doubt that is the kind of diversity of thought you have in mind.  Sending public money to private schools opens that pandora's box and I don't see how you can restrict who can get the money.

Or maybe we just let schools teach. If some some sect teaches ideas that the majority do not agree with, then so be it. They can have their opinions (deplorable or not) and then over time, hopefully the kids educated at those schools will be able to have their own reasoning on such issues. It has been happening all the time, there is a very long history of this happening already, there really is no need to change it.  you are trying to solve a problem that often gets solved on its own.   

 

We are a country that has been grounded in individual liberty. That should be respected even when we have to deal with those who may act deplorably. 

 

3 hours ago, Foraker said:

What about teaching LGBT kids that they are damned -- I assume that's ok, right?  Catholic schools are all over that one. 

 

I would appreciate either evidentiary support for this accusation or a retraction of it.

 

I send my children to a fairly conservative Catholic school.  I have not seen anything like what you describe in the course materials nor have I heard of such materials from the parents of older students.  Most Catholic schools are even more liberal.

 

3 hours ago, Foraker said:

Granted, the current political party in power gushes over religious schools and sending government money to private interests (in return for campaign contributions from for-profit schools or highly paid "nonprofit" executives), so you're right that this is unlikely to change.  And despite repeated Court decisions saying that the state funding model for public schools is inadequate, that won't stop the state executive and legislative branches from ignoring the Courts.

 

But a bigger problem for the backpack bill or vouchers-for-everyone bill is cost, which runs up against the Republican plan to cut more taxes, particularly for the wealthy.  I just don't see where the state gets the money to adequately fund both public and private schools. 

 

Nevertheless, I predict that the courts are going to say that funding for public schools must be at least as great as the funding for private schools. And the state legislature will continue to increase funding for private schools and cut state funding for public schools until the public school system collapses and Ohio's academic achievement rate looks a lot more like Alabama's than Massachusetts's.  And Republicans will claim that that will bring the Fortune 100 running to Ohio like never before.  Rinse and repeat.

 

I agreed with you above that the universal vouchers concept is likely to run up against cost barriers, even without further tax cuts.

 

That said, you're picking a curious time to castigate Republican successes in bringing Fortune 100 firms to Ohio, considering the Intel plant and some of the large ancillary businesses that have gotten in line to locate or expand here on the heels of that major announcement.

 

  

1 hour ago, Foraker said:

But I am worried that opening the door to spending public money on non-public schools means funding schools that a lot of people would have problems with -- we won't be able to deny funding to the China communist school or the Nazi school or the Muslim madrassas that only teach the Koran.  I doubt that is the kind of diversity of thought you have in mind.  Sending public money to private schools opens that pandora's box and I don't see how you can restrict who can get the money.

 

This is a very fair concern.  So, just as a matter of preference hierarchies, I know we differ on this, but to be clear, mine are that (1) if I need to accept the existence of madrassas or neo-Nazi homeschool cooperatives in order to expand meaningful school choice to lower-income families and reduce suburban-flight pressure among upper-income ones, then that's a tradeoff that I'll reluctantly accept, but (2) I'd much prefer to find a legally defensible line that allows for normal private schools to benefit from expanded school choice without greenlighting madrassas or neo-Nazi homeschool cooperatives.  This is based on my current view of the lay of the land, which is that phenomena like those neo-Nazi homeschool cooperatives are vanishingly small outliers given greater visibility by the Internet, whereas most meaningful expansions of school choice will take the form of parents choosing to leave underperforming and unsafe public schools for mainstream private schools; I don't think the Pandora's Box effect is going to be particularly damaging in practice.  (Unless, of course, you're one of those who sees any flight from the public schools as damaging, not just flight to madrassas or neo-Nazi homeschool collectives.)  Tolerating extreme, beyond-mainstream speech in order to safeguard controversial-but-mainstream speech is a fairly familiar theme in First Amendment law, and for good reason.

FYI: Good law didn't mean "the current law". It was meant to imply good as in quality, beneficial, etc. I understand precedent implies legality at the time. I have no idea what you mean by implying I don't like the first amendment. I can't follow your logic to decipher what that is supposed to be implying.

 

The issue is that you want money everyone puts in to public education to be stripped from public education and sent to private education based on where people send their children to school. And on top of that, you want the private education that receives public funds to not be subject to any public oversight.

 

If you want to send your children to private schools, or homeschool them, that should be allowed. Nothing wrong with that even though I think some examples are detrimental to the child. But you can't argue for publicly funding private schools and then say it's not the government's place to oversee the education they are helping pay for.

Edit: this is in response to Brutus. Haven't read Gram's

1 hour ago, Clefan14 said:

The fact that a single religion is so intertwined into our government and public schools is such a shame for our country at a federal and state level. 

 

What religion is so intertwined into our government and public schools and why is it a shame for our country?

Lol Christianity. And it is a shame because the separation of church and state is critical. And why should Christianity be so superior to all other religions in terms of its prioritization in the above mentioned areas?

43 minutes ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

Or maybe we just let schools teach. If some some sect teaches ideas that the majority do not agree with, then so be it. They can have their opinions (deplorable or not) and then over time, hopefully the kids educated at those schools will be able to have their own reasoning on such issues. It has been happening all the time, there is a very long history of this happening already, there really is no need to change it.  you are trying to solve a problem that often gets solved on its own.   

 

We are a country that has been grounded in individual liberty. That should be respected even when we have to deal with those who may act deplorably. 

 

I’m very curious if you’re okay with schools mentioning Rosa Parks’ skin color? Or is the civil rights movement, mlk, etc too “woke” for the desantis crowd?

1 hour ago, Lazarus said:

 

Oh boy the old $ thing.  Parents and family environment matter much more than how much $ the schools spend per student.  

 

 

 

The increased spending in high-poverty areas tries to make up for the fact that the students in those areas' have personal networks not only not working for them but against them. I went to an almost exclusively blue-collar high school and my personal network was actively against my college attedance, shoved their money from working in the skilled trades and automotive jobs in my face during my early 20s, laughed as I moved back to town single after grad school while the whole rest of the town was already in commited relationships and assumed i had 100k plus in student debt (even though I had zero). They absolutely despised my parents for blocking my decision to go to the vocational school back when I was 16.

Just now, Clefan14 said:

Lol Christianity. And it is a shame because the separation of church and state is critical. And why should Christianity be so superior to all other religions in terms of its prioritization in the above mentioned areas?

 

If Christianity is so intertwined with our public schools, then why is the desire for a Christian education among the most common reasons people cite for leaving them for private schools?

 

Christianity has never been less intertwined with our public schools.  If it were actually intertwined with our public schools in any meaningful sense, the school choice movement would be either radically different in composition and/or nonexistent.

Is that why people are going to private schools? Or is the the self segregating aspect? Or because we’ve defunded public schools in this country (and state) so much? 
 

Regardless, very telling and interesting response. 

23 minutes ago, Clefan14 said:

I’m very curious if you’re okay with schools mentioning Rosa Parks’ skin color? Or is the civil rights movement, mlk, etc too “woke” for the desantis crowd?

In the Catholic high school I went to, we learned the truth about Rosa Parks and that she was a kind old white lady who needed help riding a bus. 

 

In all seriousness. Schools should teach history without a political spin on it. Liberal or conservative, teachers should refrain from interjecting their personal politics into the matter and not push a social agenda that offends many in the community.  That does not mean you have to teach America Awesome all the time and has no flaws. You still teach redlining, you teach Jim Crow and you teach about all the warts that happened throughout history.  It does not mean you teach kids to self flagellate themselves because someone who died almost 175 years before they were born and that has zero relation to them but owned slaves and that these kids carry some type of guilt with them for the sins of some person with whom they never met, never knew and had no relation too.  

Edited March 20, 20232 yr by Brutus_buckeye

7 minutes ago, Clefan14 said:

Is that why people are going to private schools? Or is the the self segregating aspect? Or because we’ve defunded public schools in this country (and state) so much? 
 

Regardless, very telling and interesting response. 

 

 

Many people go to private school because they feel the education is better than public schools. Others choose them because a deeply help religious sincerity. Others choose to go there because they may want a smaller class size or they want more individual attention. Other parents send their kids there because the kids are in class with other kids who parents are actively involved in the education. Finally others choose it based on a curriculum they desire for their kids. There are many reasons why parents may be inclined to choose a private or religious education for their children. 

Whether you agree with their choice or not is irrelevant. It is a choice personal to them and should be respected as such. 

https://www.theohiopressnetwork.com/news/ohio/ohio-state-teachers-retirement-system-had-massive-investment-in-failed-bank/article_bdfd1598-c479-11ed-a534-5b95f38626ea.html#tncms-source=article-nav-next

 

Ohio State Teachers Retirement System lost $40~ million in SVB investment - the most of any public school pension:

 

18 minutes ago, Gramarye said:

 

If Christianity is so intertwined with our public schools, then why is the desire for a Christian education among the most common reasons people cite for leaving them for private schools?

 

 

Because if their kids hear that dinosaurs existed or that babies don't come from storks it is an attack on the parents' identities. Other people aren't as rational as you.

2 minutes ago, Lazarus said:

https://www.theohiopressnetwork.com/news/ohio/ohio-state-teachers-retirement-system-had-massive-investment-in-failed-bank/article_bdfd1598-c479-11ed-a534-5b95f38626ea.html#tncms-source=article-nav-next

 

Ohio State Teachers Retirement System lost $40~ million in SVB investment - the most of any public school pension:

 

 

Well how are you going to get growth without tech?

3 minutes ago, Clefan14 said:

Is that why people are going to private schools? Or is the the self segregating aspect? Or because we’ve defunded public schools in this country (and state) so much? 
 

Regardless, very telling and interesting response. 

 

With respect to "defunding," as was pointed out in the discussion between @Lazarus and @GCrites80s upthread, it's not a resource question directly.  Public schools are generally more generously funded on a per-pupil basis than private schools, particularly at the K-8 level.  However, the much fairer critique is that they are compelled to spend a disproportionate amount of that funding on things other than classroom instruction (and valuable extracurriculars); and then, beyond that, they choose to spend even more on things that are beyond classroom instruction (and valuable extracurriculars), including unnecessary administrative bloat.  The administrator-to-teacher ratio at my kids' Catholic school is tiny.  Almost 400 students; zero vice principals, zero deans (dean of students, etc.).  There's the principal and two administrative assistants.  That's the entire office staff.

 

On the self-segregation aspect: Before I put words in your mouth, what do you mean specifically by that?  We already have some forms of self-segregation even within public schools because of the obvious existence of hard school district boundaries, but also within larger districts because of magnet schools and the like.  But I don't know if that's the kind of self-segregation you meant.

30 minutes ago, Gramarye said:

I would appreciate either evidentiary support for this accusation or a retraction of it.

I will not retract it.  I realize that the official church position is "love the sinner, hate the sin" or something similar, but when the teachers tell a kid that the kid is going to hell if they act on their love, that the church will not bless but rather condemn their love, that is damaging to LGBT kids trying to figure out their place in the church, the school, and the community. This is based on events at a Catholic school within the past decade. That is a discussion for another forum other than school funding, however, so I won't continue this discussion here.

 

37 minutes ago, Gramarye said:

This is based on my current view of the lay of the land, which is that phenomena like those neo-Nazi homeschool cooperatives are vanishingly small outliers given greater visibility by the Internet, whereas most meaningful expansions of school choice will take the form of parents choosing to leave underperforming and unsafe public schools for mainstream private schools; I don't think the Pandora's Box effect is going to be particularly damaging in practice.  (Unless, of course, you're one of those who sees any flight from the public schools as damaging, not just flight to madrassas or neo-Nazi homeschool collectives.)  Tolerating extreme, beyond-mainstream speech in order to safeguard controversial-but-mainstream speech is a fairly familiar theme in First Amendment law, and for good reason.

 

Except that unlike in the past, the increasing availability of vouchers is funding extreme schools to spread their message.  It remains to be seen how that plays out, but the circumstances have changed.  I may be overestimating the danger, and you may be underestimating the impact of this new funding source.

 

 

Quote

most meaningful expansions of school choice will take the form of parents choosing to leave underperforming and unsafe public schools for mainstream private schools

This is a popular myth.  And the Ohio legislature is looking to expand vouchers to every family in Ohio, without regard to public school performance.  With a Republican dominated government, I don't see any reason why they won't do what they say they're going to do.

 

3 minutes ago, Gramarye said:

Public schools are generally more generously funded on a per-pupil basis than private schools, particularly at the K-8 level. 

Only in the school districts wiling and able to increase taxes on themselves, funding from the state is lower for public school students than what is provided by vouchers.

 

4 minutes ago, Gramarye said:

Public schools are generally more generously funded on a per-pupil basis than private schools, particularly at the K-8 level.  However, the much fairer critique is that they are compelled to spend a disproportionate amount of that funding on things other than classroom instruction (and valuable extracurriculars); and then, beyond that, they choose to spend even more on things that are beyond classroom instruction (and valuable extracurriculars), including unnecessary administrative bloat.  The administrator-to-teacher ratio at my kids' Catholic school is tiny.  Almost 400 students; zero vice principals, zero deans (dean of students, etc.).  There's the principal and two administrative assistants.  That's the entire office staff.

You are correct that public schools are compelled to fund a lot more things that private schools do not have to.  For example, private school staff don't prepare IEPs for students with special needs -- those students that private schools choose to accept who need an IEP get it from their public school.  Another "unfunded mandate" on the public school, along with busing for those private school students.  Private schools also don't generally take students with severe learning disabilities (Lawrence is an excellent exception).  Private schools also don't accept kids with discipline problems and can simply dismiss problem students that public schools have to try to educate.  You don't need an assistant principal or an extra counselor to deal with problem kids if you can just dismiss the problem from your school.

 

Public schools should be better funded by the state because they have more obligations. 

At one private school I attended there was the principal and then the owner. You knew you were in deep doo doo if you had to go see her even though she was a highly accomplished academic herself.

27 minutes ago, GCrites80s said:

54 minutes ago, Gramarye said:

 

If Christianity is so intertwined with our public schools, then why is the desire for a Christian education among the most common reasons people cite for leaving them for private schools?

Because if their kids hear that dinosaurs existed or that babies don't come from storks it is an attack on the parents' identities. Other people aren't as rational as you.

 

🙄

 

I know you're kind of being silly, but I get the sense that far too many school choice opponents genuinely believe that that's the kind of thing that Catholic schools teach.  (Somehow they manage to believe that despite the number of kids we send, perennially, to elite colleges.)

The state should be able to audit schools to make sure public funds are spent appropriately.  Agree or disagree, voucher recipients are not subject to audit.  Should they be?

20 minutes ago, Gramarye said:

 

🙄

 

I know you're kind of being silly, but I get the sense that far too many school choice opponents genuinely believe that that's the kind of thing that Catholic schools teach.  (Somehow they manage to believe that despite the number of kids we send, perennially, to elite colleges.)

 

Thing is, yes in Cleveland and Cincinnati Catholic schools are the default idea of a religious school. But in Columbus and much of the rest of the state Catholic schools aren't all that popular so private schools shift to cold-blooded capitalist charter schools located in abandoned Best Buys, drenched-in-Alabama-accent fire-and-brimstone schools, snake handling ones in trailers and the few highly selective brain schools.

22 minutes ago, Foraker said:

The state should be able to audit schools to make sure public funds are spent appropriately.  Agree or disagree, voucher recipients are not subject to audit.  Should they be?

So I am on the audit committee at my kids catholic school now. WHen you receive state funds, you have to segregate them from areas where there is religious education. You can't use math textbooks provided by the state in religious education. Yes, you can talk about religion or Christianity in the same classroom, just not in that instructional period. When the speech pathologist provided by the state counsels the kids, they may work in the building but they may not discuss religious issues. This stuff is audited.

Ohio GOP Wants to Ban Higher Education Employee Strikes

 

A massive higher education bill that would prohibit university staff and employees from striking was introduced last week and is already drawing harsh criticism from labor unions. 

 

State Senator Jerry Cirino, R-Kirtland, introduced Senate Bill 83 which would have wide-ranging effects on colleges and universities around the state. 

 

“I would describe the bill as a radical set of solutions in search of problems,” said David Jackson, president of Bowling Green State University’s Faculty Association, a chapter of American Association of University Professors (AAUP) and the American Federation of Teachers.

 

“A bill proposing a mindless, one size fits all set of regulations for the complex and different kinds of universities that the state of Ohio has is, in our view, a completely misguided approach to higher education policy,” he said. 

 

If passed, the bill would prohibit “bias” in classrooms, programs with Chinese schools, mandatory diversity training, labor strikes, and boycotts or disinvestments. 

 

The bill would require American history courses, public syllabuses, and teacher information be put online; tenure evaluations based on if the educator showed bias or taught with bias; and rewrite mission statements to include that educators teach so students can reach their “own conclusions.”

 

“When you look at the bill, as a whole, it’s an absolute administrative nightmare for colleges and universities to implement everything that’s in this legislation,” said Sara Kilpatrick, the executive director of the Ohio chapter of the American Association of University Professors. 

 

“It’s going to require more administrators and it’s going to require a lot more paperwork,” she said. “And those kinds of things all take away from educating students.”

 

Way more below:

https://columbusunderground.com/ohio-gop-wants-to-ban-higher-education-employee-strikes-ocj1/

 

13 minutes ago, Foraker said:

Quote

most meaningful expansions of school choice will take the form of parents choosing to leave underperforming and unsafe public schools for mainstream private schools

This is a popular myth.  And the Ohio legislature is looking to expand vouchers to every family in Ohio, without regard to public school performance.  With a Republican dominated government, I don't see any reason why they won't do what they say they're going to do.

 

I'm curious on what basis you say that that's a myth.  Do you really think more families want to leave Revere than want to leave Akron Public?  While I know there's more poverty in the suburbs than often appreciated, a lot of wealthy suburban public school families could also afford private school if it really mattered to them, even without this proposed EdChoice-for-all.  Why haven't they already left?  (I mean, some have, we laugh at the families that live in Revere but choose Old Trail on top of that, but so it goes.)

 

Making vouchers universally available doesn't mean that they'll be universally or even equally/proportionally used.

17 minutes ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

When you receive state funds, you have to segregate them from areas where there is religious education. You can't use math textbooks provided by the state in religious education. 

 

I thought that people knew this.  

 

My church's grade school and credit union were on adjacent lots but the credit union wasn't technically part of the school.  That's where they parked the trailer for the state-funded speech therapist, and the gifted class was held in the credit union itself.  Yes, there were customers in the credit union while the gifted classes were conducted.  At some point they finished the basement and the gifted classes were moved downstairs.  

 

One of the great things I remember from the gifted class was watching this film:

 

The film is completely amazing.  

 

I recall that the religion classes had completely different audiovisual equipment.  A different film strip projector, different 16mm film projector, different TV on a cart.  The books were purchased by the school, of course, rather than having been supplied by the public school district.  

 

 

 

 

 

Edited March 20, 20232 yr by Lazarus

19 minutes ago, GCrites80s said:

 

Thing is, yes in Cleveland and Cincinnati Catholic schools are the default idea of a religious school. But in Columbus and much of the rest of the state Catholic schools aren't all that popular so private schools shift to cold-blooded capitalist charter schools located in abandoned Best Buys, drenched-in-Alabama-accent fire-and-brimstone schools, snake handling ones in trailers and the few highly selective brain schools.

 

I'm not sure that the Columbus Catholic schools being less prevalent necessarily means that cold-blooded capitalist charter schools in abandoned Best Buys are more so.  And to put it mildly, Columbus isn't exactly known for being Ohio's fire-and-brimstone heartland.

 

And, of course, in Columbus and even in the larger cities with more Catholic schools still remaining, one of the goals of the various dioceses of Ohio is to be able to reopen some of the Catholic schools that have been forced to consolidate and close.

49 minutes ago, Foraker said:

The state should be able to audit schools to make sure public funds are spent appropriately.  Agree or disagree, voucher recipients are not subject to audit.  Should they be?

 

Wait, are you talking about the recipients (the students and their families) or the schools?

 

In those places where vouchers are means-tested, absolutely recipients should be subject to audit.  If you lie about your income to get a means-tested benefit, that's fraud and absolutely should not be beyond investigation.

9 minutes ago, Gramarye said:

In those places where vouchers are means-tested, absolutely recipients should be subject to audit.  If you lie about your income to get a means-tested benefit, that's fraud and absolutely should not be beyond investigation.

Right  now vouchers are not means tested, you can qualify for them if you live in a district with a failing school. At my children's school, there are some families who live in fairly tony subdivisions who qualify for vouchers because their local public school received a failing grade. 

Just now, Brutus_buckeye said:

Right  now vouchers are not means tested, you can qualify for them if you live in a district with a failing school. At my children's school, there are some families who live in fairly tony subdivisions who qualify for vouchers because their local public school received a failing grade. 

 

I thought I remembered that but then I also thought that might have been a temporary thing and I was worried about speaking out of turn (there's EdChoice and EdChoice Expansion, the latter of which is means-tested and I'm not sure if that's subject to a sunset).

 

I'm aware that the basic EdChoice scholarship is available to all residents of failing public school systems, regardless of need, and while I don't take advantage of that at the moment (my kids' current school declines EdChoice), that would change for high school because Hoban and SVSM both accept EdChoice (I think Walsh does a well but that one's not really in the running).  That's actually one of the reasons we haven't looked at moving to the 'burbs, even though there are townships not too far away with no municipal income tax, as opposed to Akron's 2.75%.  Three kids times $7500/yr times four years is $90,000 in education benefits if we stay put.  Still not enough to offset the amount we'll pay in city income tax by staying put for the next 15 years but definitely takes a good bite out of it.

Great I’m so glad we’re all on the hook for $90k in school vouchers for you. And the teachers of these private schools get paid crumbs, so it probably just goes to the church. 
 

in reference to our dialogue before, my comment was that private schools became popular once public schools started to integrate racially. You make a good observation that most communities are very hyper segregated by income, race, etc in our state. I wonder why that is… Imagine if we went to county wide schools in Summit, Stark, Hamilton, Cuyahoga, or Franklin counties. Would there be a higher demand for private schools and why? 
 

I guess the point I’m trying to make is education is “supposed to be” equal opportunity for all in this country. That is what public entities attempt to do. Defunding them via subsidizing private schools and their religious entities is ridiculous. If you want to choose private schools because your local public schools “just aren’t the right fit” that’s fine. The fact that we’re funneling $ into any religious institution, let alone ones that don’t have the best track record is … well very Ohio (and America).

41 minutes ago, Gramarye said:

 

I'm not sure that the Columbus Catholic schools being less prevalent necessarily means that cold-blooded capitalist charter schools in abandoned Best Buys are more so.  And to put it mildly, Columbus isn't exactly known for being Ohio's fire-and-brimstone heartland.

 

 

Get thee to the Uncool Crescent. No you won't see a bazillion charter schools in Dublin-Worthington-Westerville but the West, East, South Sides and Morse Road have them in spades.