5 ms·
Charter school vouchers are an inflated ideal; what percentage of charter schools provide higher quality (and, in states where the science pedigree of the curri
by warfangle 14y ago
Charter school vouchers are an inflated ideal; what percentage of charter schools provide higher quality (and, in states where the science pedigree of the curriculum is in question, a more truthful) education?
Don't spout rhetoric; provide sources. If my recollections are accurate, more charter schools fail at this than succeed.
- natrius 14y agoAllowing parents to choose the schools their children attend is inherently superior to forcing them to attend government-run schools. Proof of better outcomes is unnecessary. Sure, some charter/private schools are worse than government-run schools. Parents can easily avoid those.
- dmpk2k 14y agoProof of better outcomes is unnecessary. That sounds anti-science if ever I heard it. Claiming inherent superiority while denigrating evidence and empirical approaches is cut from the same cloth as religion, and certainly won't convince those of us with higher standards.
- randallsquared 14y agoIt depends on what you think "better" means. If you use "better" to mean "fits what I think ought to happen", then it makes sense to test market outcomes against nonmarket outcomes and decide which is better. If you use "better" to mean "what most people prefer", then the market is, in most cases, the best way we have to determine that, and talking about proof of better outcomes is analogous to asking for empirical proof that empiricism is a better way to find truth.
- cynicalkane 14y agoThis is a great attitude to make yourself feel better, but it's not terribly productive if you can't produce some science yourself, or if you are, you know, any way inclined towards respecting humans' individual choices. Economists and sociologists, who are much better at science than educators, try to avoid making the mistake of knocking peoples' choices unless they're obviously irrational, because forcing peoples behavior to be a certain way in the name of "science" is an easy way to be disastrously wrong.
- vidarh 14y agoLetting parents choose schools is not any more respective the choice of the individuals most directly affected than having government decide on the school.
- shinratdr 14y ago> Proof of better outcomes is unnecessary. That could be the most ridiculous comment I have ever read on HN.
- polymatter 14y ago> Proof of better outcomes is unnecessary What I think natrius means, is that the burden of proof is on the anti-choice option. Surely the default should be giving parents a choice on which schools their children attend. In other words, we shouldn't need evidence to show giving parents a choice gives better outcomes because the evidence should be provided that taking away parents choice is better. If there is any doubt then give parents a choice.
- warfangle 14y agoExcept where government run schools are the only option for schools, like somewhere with a fantastic education system. Like, say, Finland.
- cynicalkane 14y agoIf you're asking for short-term narrowly-defined measurable outcomes, you're asking the wrong question. Everyone knows this when talking about No Child Left Behind, but it goes out the window when we talk about charter schools. But choice should be the default, and in many places parents overwhelmingly prefer charter schools. Forgive me for thinking maybe they should have that choice.