The argument I made is in the inherent flaw of many people to open their mind to alternative points of view.
Actually, that's not what you did, Michael. You stated your point of view without making an argument for it. I can responsd by either letting it just sit there, in effect ignoring it, or I can engage you. I started a conversation. I characterized your post, then offered some information about my own approach. Which you chose to ignore. You simply skipped right over the talk of Central Park East.
You also failed to notice earlier posts I've made in which I argued that, if one is focused on how to improve public education, vouchers may be a help. But most of the unfortunate arguments for vouchers are as ways to cripple if not eliminate public schools. And public schools are one of the signal achievements of the this country.
In the inner cities, where education is failing systemically across the board, I am willing to try almost anything. I am open to your ideas. Yet, I believe there is no argument I could make which would in any way alter your view regarding the value of vouchers.
"Inner cities" is not quite the right term, since the last time I checked the east side of Manhattan is inner city, as is Park Slope in Brooklyn, the upper west side in Manhattan. Public schools are doing reasonably well there. It's in the core places in Harlem, in the south Bronx, and in certain sections of Queens and Brooklyn, that you have in mind. At least when we consider NYC.
My points, and again as long as you don't make an argument for your position, it simply remains a point counter to yours, are that (a) vouchers are usually offered not as a way to improve education but as a way to cut the funding for public schools; (b) when the rationale and the supporting institutions offer them as solutions, which has occured in a few situations, to improve public education, then they should be looked at carefully and compared with other means--vouchers simply stated as vouchers are simply ideological constructs--we need to pay attention to the consequences.
Charter schools are interesting innovations. And more complicated than vouchers. There are several good ones around the NY area.
As for the cycle of despair, there is little doubt that the last president to pay attention to the kinds of urban issues that impact the neighborhoods I'm talking about was LBJ. The rest took a hike. Nothing will help, not voucher, not whatever, until the federal government takes that issue seriously. Unfortunately, it tends to take disasters to focus the government on this issue.
Two reasons for the problem, at least the largest ones in my view: (a) the rightward drift of American politics at the national level; and (b) the failure of urban minorities to vote. |
