Nutter to speak at DNC:Is this the moment we'll know if he will abandon us?

[nickster]

Speaking of Olivia, isn't she off to college this year?

[raider.adam]

No he said in NPR interview prior to speaking that it was vetted by the DNC.

Vetted doesn't mean they wrote it. Without know specifically what he said, that would imply his team wrote it and the DNC checked it and approved it.

Details matter here. His daughter went to a regular public elementary that had a history of being a small school with a small cadre of very involved parents, some of which are themselves college faculty and professionals. Its also a school where a lot of kids straight out of Mantua and West Powelton with all the problems that entail go to. It was the choice of a parent with a lot of experience on how to make the most of the current system would make. From there she got into our most prestigious and competitive academic magnet school program.

Powel is not the equivalent of "private school" by any means. Its just a small public with history of strong parental involvement. Olivia Nutter's track is not the default experience of most Philly public school parents but its the exact same one that, for example, the folks that own my local coffee shop followed with their kid, just about simultaneously. Its one available to regular parents but very likely parents who know how the local district works and how to transfer within district schools.

Why are you talking about Powell? Obviously I am talking about Masterman. Nutter's daughter went to a high school, using public money, that has almost no special needs students (and I am guessing none that are for learning disabilities) and that requires criteria to get into.

Isn't that exactly what anti-voucher advocates complain about?

Nothing about that path is even remotely like the school district directly handing out money for people go to parochial or private prep schools. Its "school choice" of the, lots of charters and magnets, entirely public model at best.

Which only a handful of students have access to.

Which is exactly the kind of all public non-voucher flexibility that Nutter took advantage of.

So why not let more students have the exact same opportunities? The only difference the Masterman process and school choice vouchers is Masterman is run by the school district and the private school isn't. nutter didn't send Olivia to the typical public high school. He sent her through the same type of process that school choice vouchers for private schools would be.

Actually this Aug. 8 Washington Post article says that D.C.'s voucher program is still in operation for the small number of D.C. families poor enough to qualify. And if you qualify, its still a lottery process to get the voucher.
Private-school vouchers go to about 300 D.C. students - The Washington Post

Obama and the Democrats killed it in 2009. The Republicans fought to reauthorize it in 2011.

So of 1,700 kids in the disctrict at less than 184 federal poverty line who won the lottery, the most they can get is $8 grand for elementary school, $12 for middle/high.



Sidwell costs $33,268 for primary, $34,468 for middle/upper. So a qualifying family from say Anacostia would still have to come up with around $22 k / $24 k per year to put them in Sidwell Friends where Sasha and Malia go (and Chelsea Clinton went).

The parents using this are going to cheaper parochials and Christian schools, I'm sure.

Except you also overlook the Sidwell hands out scholarships. If low income parents are coming to them with $12K in a voucher, it makes it much easier for such private institutions to make up the difference. If they budget $X a year for scholarships, vouchers would help that money go farther to more students.

But again, no one is saying everyone is going to Sidwell. The point is that it gives students opportunities to schools they normally wouldn't be able to have.

[mixiboi]

3 Takeaways From Mayor Nutter

The line that stood out:

If there’s one thing we can tell about Nutter, in his year-long journey carrying Obama’s water in Philadelphia, it’s that he has, well, feelings about Romney.

[seand]

So why not let more students have the exact same opportunities? The only difference the Masterman process and school choice vouchers is Masterman is run by the school district and the private school isn't. nutter didn't send Olivia to the typical public high school. He sent her through the same type of process that school choice vouchers for private schools would be.

Some anti-school choice folks do indeed hate magnet schools because of their competitive criteria for admission and some pro-voucher folks do also champion public magnets but public magnets are not the same as vouchers. Not even a little bit. A voucher hands tax dollars to parents to directly pay for private religious education but typically doesn't cover the full cost. Public magnets in schools run directly by the school district, for free, open to the best and brightest with no need for any financial contribution and no religious teaching/indoctrination paid for with tax dollars are vastly different things.

Its disengenuous to keep insisting they are basically the same. Public money to religious institutions that are not directly accountable to the school district for academic standards are not the same as 100% public, non-religious academic magnet schools.

[seand]

But again, no one is saying everyone is going to Sidwell. The point is that it gives students opportunities to schools they normally wouldn't be able to have.

An array of public charters, magnets, special mission schools also give students a variety of educational opportunities but they don't involve taking tax dollars to subsidize religious institutions. Period.

We do a bad enough job at supervising some public charters as is, giving tax payer money directly to every crazy church who wants turn "education" into a religious indoctrination session for training the next generation of "missionaries" and religious recruiters doesn't sound like a good idea to me.

[raider.adam]

Some anti-school choice folks do indeed hate magnet schools because of their competitive criteria for admission and some pro-voucher folks do also champion public magnets but public magnets are not the same as vouchers. Not even a little bit. A voucher hands tax dollars to parents to directly pay for private religious education but typically doesn't cover the full cost. Public magnets in schools run directly by the school district, for free, open to the best and brightest with no need for any financial contribution and no religious teaching/indoctrination paid for with tax dollars are vastly different things.

Its disengenuous to keep insisting they are basically the same. Public money to religious institutions that are not directly accountable to the school district for academic standards are not the same as 100% public, non-religious academic magnet schools.

An array of public charters, magnets, special mission schools also give students a variety of educational opportunities but they don't involve taking tax dollars to subsidize religious institutions. Period.

We do a bad enough job at supervising some public charters as is, giving tax payer money directly to every crazy church who wants turn "education" into a religious indoctrination session for training the next generation of "missionaries" and religious recruiters doesn't sound like a good idea to me.

This defense is BS because even in situations where parochial schools aren't allowed, anti-voucher people don't support it.

[seand]

This defense is BS because even in situations where parochial schools aren't allowed, anti-voucher people don't support it.

Vouchers for parochials also means vouchers for Moonie-owned industrial training schools, vouchers for Black Hebrew and Nation of Islam schools, vouchers for white supremicist Christian Identity schools.

One of the hallmarks of public education is that it sets a shared standard of educations and its free for everyone. The number of non-religious private schools that vouchers would cover entirely (even with partial need-based scholarships from the school) is very, very small, if it exists at all.

For the teacher's union die-hards, even charters run by a parent controlled non-profits are "privitizing education" because its eliminating union jobs.

Somewhere in between, the truth lies.

[seand]

An amusing story of a pro-voucher politician not following her position to its logical conclusion.
Louisiana Legislator Upset That Education Vouchers Can Go to Muslim Schools | Crooks and Liars

[raider.adam]

Vouchers for parochials also means vouchers for Moonie-owned industrial training schools, vouchers for Black Hebrew and Nation of Islam schools, vouchers for white supremicist Christian Identity schools.

One of the hallmarks of public education is that it sets a shared standard of educations and its free for everyone. The number of non-religious private schools that vouchers would cover entirely (even with partial need-based scholarships from the school) is very, very small, if it exists at all.

Really? I'm looking around and if there is a set standard of public education, it is a really low one.

[seand]

Really? I'm looking around and if there is a set standard of public education, it is a really low one.

But its still higher than the standard you would get when you allow every cult and religious fringe group to "educate" to the standards of their particular religious beliefs.

You agree that accountability is low in publics, why would any sane person think that accountability would improve rather than worsen when we start writing taxpayer checks to religious yahoos with even looser rules of fiscal accountability?

[raider.adam]

But its still higher than the standard you would get when you allow every cult and religious fringe group to "educate" to the standards of their particular religious beliefs.

You agree that accountability is low in publics, why would any sane person think that accountability would improve rather than worsen when we start writing taxpayer checks to religious yahoos with even looser rules of fiscal accountability?

Get off the religious rant. Even if religious schools aren't allowed, the anti-voucher people are still anti-voucher. As for accountability and guidelines, it wouldn't be the first government check that has strings attached to it for the organization receiving it.

I mean seriously, are you going to come out against daycare reimbursements because of the fear of religious day care institutions? Should all day care centers be owned and run by the government to prevent the risk?

[seand]

Daycare reimbursements as benefit to get moms in the work force is a different fundamental goal from universal public education. One is just to get the mom working and the other is to provide the tools to be voting American citizen, fully ready to participate in our economy and democracy. Giving blank checks to religious yahoos is not a step towards that latter goal.

I oppose tax-payer funding for religious education, as anyone who really appreciates the "establishement" clause of the First Amendment should as well. I'm not really interested in how you want to frame anti-voucher, pro-voucher. I oppose tax payers subsidizing religious indoctrination in the name of "public education".

[raider.adam]

Daycare reimbursements as benefit to get moms in the work force is a different fundamental goal from universal public education. One is just to get the mom working and the other is to provide the tools to be voting American citizen, fully ready to participate in our economy and democracy. Giving blank checks to religious yahoos is not a step towards that latter goal.

So religious wackos influencing kids on the taxpayer dime is ok as long as they aren't k-12?

I oppose tax-payer funding for religious education, as anyone who really appreciates the "establishement" clause of the First Amendment should as well. I'm not really interested in how you want to frame anti-voucher, pro-voucher. I oppose tax payers subsidizing religious indoctrination in the name of "public education".

So no Pell Grants for Villanova or St. Joes?

[seand]

So religious wackos influencing kids on the taxpayer dime is ok as long as they aren't k-12?

Yes, because day care is just that, day care. We are not relying on it the primary means to build democracy-ready, 21st century economy ready citizens. K-12 is in fact a whole other ball of wax.

So no Pell Grants for Villanova or St. Joes?

K-12 is the basic level of public education you are required by law to attend and to provide for citizens. Adults (who college students are legally) are presumably already capable of critical thinking about what they are being taught at college level. Second graders not so much. Apples and oranges.

[raider.adam]

Yes, because day care is just that, day care. We are not relying on it the primary means to build democracy-ready, 21st century economy ready citizens. K-12 is in fact a whole other ball of wax.

Really? Because it sure seems that pre-k education has been a major plank in the Democratic platform.

K-12 is the basic level of public education you are required by law to attend and to provide for citizens. Adults (who college students are legally) are presumably already capable of critical thinking about what they are being taught at college level. Second graders not so much. Apples and oranges.

How does that make a difference on the Establishment Clause?

[seand]

Really? Because it sure seems that pre-k education has been a major plank in the Democratic platform.

Babysitting is not educating. If the experts think educating benefits from extending educating one year earlier, it still is not the same thing as expecting our daycare provider from having a state teacher's accreditation.

How does that make a difference on the Establishment Clause?

Noone has to get a college education. Pell grants are a need based award towards adults pursuing job skills. Its not tax dollars for the state required level of education being used instead to pay for religious indoctrination of children. Also not every "self-realization" and meditation "school" actually qualifies for Pell Grants. If it doesn't matriculate to standard educational goals, you can't get a Pell Grant for it.

When you apply tax dollars for the mandatory base level of education required for children to schools that do religious indoctrination, you have switched to in essence tax payers footing the bill for somebody else's Sunday school.

[raider.adam]

Babysitting is not educating. If the experts think educating benefits from extending educating one year earlier, it still is not the same thing as expecting our daycare provider from having a state teacher's accreditation.

Ok, so daycare funding can't be used on daycares that do educating because of the risk of the holy ghost infecting the childrens. We better make sure also that all pre-k schools are also only run by the government.

Noone has to get a college education. Pell grants are a need based award towards adults pursuing job skills. Its not tax dollars for the state required level of education being used instead to pay for religious indoctrination of children. Also not every "self-realization" and meditation "school" actually qualifies for Pell Grants. If it doesn't matriculate to standard educational goals, you can't get a Pell Grant for it.

When you apply tax dollars for the mandatory base level of education required for children to schools that do religious indoctrination, you have switched to in essence tax payers footing the bill for somebody else's Sunday school.

Geez, again, you can set requirements for what vouchers can pay for. You make it sound like the state would have to pay for school that teaches kids to go outside and eat dirt if they chose that as curriculum.