The American public education system

[strathmeyer]

Does anyone know why in America we are not allowed to choose which high school we go to, instead being forced to go to the one in our district? It seems that all the problems of the education system in America would disappear if student/parents were able to choose their school. If teachers refused to teach evolution, the smart parents would send their smart students to better schools, and those schools would have better test scores and better college acceptance.

Wouldn't the simple change of allowing people to choose their schools radically improve the school system?

On a side not, when I was in high school, everyone I know who wanted to go to a different high school (usually just because that's where their friends were going) were able to figure out how to do so, so it seems the current system relies on complacency.

[brodski]

Wouldn't the simple change of allowing people to choose their schools radically improve the school system?

Only if there where more school places than pupils.
for example, we have the illusion of school choice in the UK, but most of the decent schools are oversubscribed, so for many it is a case of getting your kids into whatever school will take them.

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

Well, you are allowed, you just have to pay for it.

I wonder how the whole bussing thing would work ...

~~ Paul

[TimmyBerry]

Aren't they trying out voucher systems in some states.?

[I less than three logic]

Aren't they trying out voucher systems in some states.?
It is being debated still here in Minnesota. Some want a voucher system to help pay for children to go to private schools, and others say the money should go towards improving the conditions in the current public schools instead. From some of the talks with a few of my co-workers the opinions are pretty split on the issue.

Personally I’d like to improve the public schools. I don’t particularly like the idea of my tax dollars sending children to religious private schools. Although, I’ve heard that some of those religious schools do a better job of teaching things like evolution then the public schools and it just shouldn’t be that way.

[TimmyBerry]

Having gone to 3 religious schools (k-12) of various denominations (Hebrew, Catholic day schools, Quaker boarding school), I can sincerely say that some are better than others in teaching science, as well as religion. (Some are more objective than others in teaching the latter.)

[ERGONER]

Does anyone know why in America we are not allowed to choose which high school we go to, instead being forced to go to the one in our district?...
...short answer is that it's totally a matter of arbitrary bureaucratic convenience by local American governments.

The real question is WHY we have to go to any high school at all. The topic of "choice" in American schools is a big one !

American compulsory schooling/truancy 'laws' force attendance at government or government-ruled institutions.
About 90% of Americans attend government (public) schools.

However, such compulsion is non-constitutional (illegal) in every state. Compulsory school attendance is, of course, 'involuntary servitude', prohibited under all American constitutions.

The American (.. and European) history of 'public schooling & compulsory attendance' clearly shows a deliberate coercive scheme to force the mass of the population into an Establishment mould of "civic virtues" (..always prominently including obedience to the government).

[Hydrogen Cyanide]

...

Wouldn't the simple change of allowing people to choose their schools radically improve the school system?

On a side not, when I was in high school, everyone I know who wanted to go to a different high school (usually just because that's where their friends were going) were able to figure out how to do so, so it seems the current system relies on complacency.

Depends on the school district. In our district you can go to any high school (http://www.seattleschools.org/area/eso/secondaryenrollmentguide20062007.pdf) you choose. It just happens that those who live closer to the school or have a sibling already at the school have higher priority for placement than others (some of the schools have waiting lists, like the one my boys attend). Also, you have to get yourself to the school because there would be no yellow school bus service (which due to budget concerns is being cut back for high school, one high school already is without school bus transport, and a couple others are being added next year).

Also, I know of a family that does send their kids to a high school in a neighboring suburb (which I find amusing because it is next to a highway with a casino, strip joint and pawn shops!). But it is what they want to do... so be it.

Also, it is not complusary to attend high school here. You should be registered as a homeschooler (http://www.k12.wa.us/PrivateEd/HomeBasedEd/regulations.aspx) though. At a certain age you are free to drop out, though that is not recommended (though there are programs for getting a GED or vocational training (http://www.shoreline.edu/ceo01.htm)). In addition, there is a program that allows a high student junior and senior to attend classes at a community college (where the credit hours count double for high school credits), the student just has to pass placement tests and get themselves to the college. ALSO... for very high performing students there is the option to attend the university's Early Entrance program (http://depts.washington.edu/cscy/programs/earlyentrance/).

Should that not be enough, the area has several other options to choose from... though tuition may be required (though some do have nice scholarship options). They range from high end academic to far out new age. (http://schoolguide.seattletimes.nwsource.com/private.cfm)

Just to let you know.. there is no "American public education system" as a single entity. Public school districts are run locally. So you would have to be specific which state, county, city or district you are referring to. Also, many public school districts have school boards with public meetings. If you are so inclined you may present your concerns to the school distric where you live.

In addition... schools themselves are a function of the humans who are actually in the buildings. Having graduated from the 9th school district/program I attended, I can safely say that the type and location of school is not as important as those who are in the buildings (several states, three countries). In the private school I attended for two years 5th grade was a great teacher, while the teacher I had for 6th grade was pretty worthless (I swear I knew more math than he did!).

Blanket statements of "place type of school here... followed by good/bad/indifferent" are essentially worthless.

[ERGONER]

... Also, it is not compulsory to attend high school here. You should be registered as a homeschooler though. At a certain age you are free to drop out...
No, your own reference states it is indeed compulsory for all children (ages 8 until 18) in Washington State to attend the public school in their district. State Regulations (http://www.k12.wa.us/PrivateEd/HomeBasedEd/regulations.aspx)

Of course, private schools & homeschooling can be substituted for the local public school attendance -- but only if they meet detailed rules set by the government. Thus, all schooling options are effectively government-directed -- and are mandatory for kids 8-18 years old. Failure to comply results in fines for the parents and jail for the 'truants'.

[Hydrogen Cyanide]

.... Thus, all schooling options are effectively government-directed -- and are mandatory for kids 8-18 years old. Failure to comply results in fines for the parents and jail for the 'truants'.

Thus I stand corrected (except we do get 16 year old drop outs, which is noted as an exception in a link to that link, specifically RCW 28A.225.010)... The fines are for those that are caught. It is really not a high priority, usually used to crack down on juvenile criminals or parents of neglected children.

Never the less... The OP was upset at not being able to go to high school in another district. I know that is not a universal rule (our district allows it (http://www.seattleschools.org/area/facilities-plan/assign/NonResApprovedListCurrent.pdf), and in my last high school one of my friends was from a neighboring town... which did not have the math/science level he needed, that was 30 years ago, back when smaller high schools did not offer trigonometry). If he wishes to change that regulation, then he has means in which to change it... ie, appeal to his own school district and school board. The question strathmeyer should have asked was why his or her school district did not allow cross district attendence, and that question needs to be addressed to the district which does not allow it, specifically the administration and the elected school board members (in other words participate in the "government" that makes the rules).

[NobbyNobbs]

Public schools are paid for through taxes, levied locally. You pay taxes to your school district, then you send your kids there to benefit from that money.

Suppose you could choose, at will. High School A is a great school, with lots of funds, low teacher-student ratio, and lots of extracurricular activities. High School B doesn't have enough money, is overcrowded, and doesn't offer as much to the students. Parents of students from School B see this and start choosing to send their kids to A. Fast forward 5 years, and now A is overcrowded, neither school has enough funds, etc. The good teachers leave A and head to School C, because it has a lower ratio, more funds, etc......

[wunky]

It does depend where you are. There are magnet schools in my area that you can apply to go to. Even if they are not in your district. There are students from Washington, DC who go to school in the suburbs of Maryland and Virginia. That is true for both gifted and challenged students.

I know that my cousins used a pseudo mailing address so that they could go to a different school. They went to a school in a entirely different district, but inside the same state (CA). This was 20 years ago.

[ERGONER]

... Suppose you could choose, at will.
High School A is a great school, with lots of funds, low teacher-student ratio, and lots of extracurricular activities. High School B doesn't have enough money, is overcrowded, and doesn't offer as much to the students.........

...Hmmm, same thing with restaurants in my town -- the good ones are crowded and the bad ones are struggling.

The mayor should probably establish 'restaurant districts' and require citizens to patronize the restaurants in their assigned 'district'. :D

Why shouldn't American parents & children be permitted to choose their schools and education ? It's a free country -- ain't it ??

[drkitten]

...Hmmm, same thing with restaurants in my town -- the good ones are crowded and the bad ones are struggling.

The mayor should probably establish 'restaurant districts' and require citizens to patronize the restaurants in their assigned 'district'.



The difference is that there's no "public interest" in seeing the entire population of your town being fed at good restaurants. It does me no damage if you (or your children) don't eat well.

It does, however, do me damage if you (or your children) aren't well educated. If you can't read the street signs, it makes the streets less safe for me to drive on. If you can't read the warning labels, the fire you start might spread to my house.

[ERGONER]

The difference is that there's no "public interest" in seeing the entire population of your town being fed at good restaurants. It does me no damage if you (or your children) don't eat well....
...well, I think you would agree that good nutrition/food is much more critical to the "public interest" (..especially for children) than mere 'education'.

Ultimately, 'education' is optional; food is not.

Therefore, by your implied logic, American government should establish free 'public restaurants' in every locale to ensure citizens are properly fed. A healthy, properly-fed populace is surely a top priority for the public interest.

Especially for children, nutritional neglect will cause permanent physiological damage. Parents cannot be trusted to properly feed their children; government nutritionists should directly supervise that entire process ... for the "public interest".

Any private-restaurants or home-cooked meals would, of course, have to meet strict government regulations ... if citizens somehow declined to use the wonderful free (taxpayer-funded) public restaurants in their district. ;););)

[roger]

Why shouldn't American parents & children be permitted to choose their schools and education ? It's a free country -- ain't it ??Once again, they can. Anyone who wants to can go to private school. Naturally, this cost money. We are not a 'free' country in that we get things for free.

Now, we could nationalize our schools, paid by federal taxes, and then give everyone the option of choosing. But then we'd have even more Government involved, which I'm going to think you think is a bad thing, given your previous posts about goverment.

[drkitten]

...well, I think you would agree that good nutrition/food is much more critical to the "public interest" (..especially for children) than mere 'education'.

But that's not what we're talking about here. We're not talking about "good nutrition," we're talking about the difference between "good restaurants" and "bad restaurants."

Nice try, but I caught you palming that card. Now try addressing my argument on its merits.

[ERGONER]

But that's not what we're talking about here. We're not talking about "good nutrition," we're talking about the difference between "good restaurants" and "bad restaurants."

Nice try, but I caught you palming that card. Now try addressing my argument on its merits.


...well, I introduced the basic 'restaurant analogy' here to illuminate the basic issue of free choice. I am certainly entitled to amplify my own analogy, at my discretion.

You introduced the broad undefined concept of "Public Interest" to counter the concept of free choice in American education.

Our American constitutional system of law recognizes specific common interests among the citizenry, but imposes severe limits upon the scope of those interests.

Any reason you may cite against the establishment of compulsory government nutrition-regulations & government restaurants -- applies equally against the existing government compulsory school system.

Vague collectivist concepts of Public Interest do not over-ride constitutional rights in our American legal system.

:rolleyes:

[drkitten]

...well, I introduced the basic 'restaurant analogy' here to illuminate the basic issue of free choice. I am certainly entitled to amplify my own analogy, at my discretion.

Yes, and I'm certainly entitled to point out when you deliberately misrepresend your own analogy to avoid the consequences of your own lack of reasoning.


You introduced the broad undefined concept of "Public Interest" to counter the concept of free choice in American education.

Our American constitutional system of law recognizes specific common interests among the citizenry, but imposes severe limits upon the scope of those interests.

No. Try again. "Public interest" has a well-understood meaning, and the government has a well-established right to override your "Constititional rights" in the name of "public interest." Check FindLaw for the phrase "strict scrutiny" or "compelling government interest."

If you're going to make statements about the US legal system, you might as well make statements that are within shouting distance of being supportable under any theory of law.

[ERGONER]

... "Public interest" has a well-understood meaning, and the government has a well-established right to override your "Constititional rights" in the name of "public interest." ....

OK, I'm always eager to learn. :)

Since you firmly state that the term "Public Interest" has a well-understood meaning -- please post that meaning here.

I was unable to find the term "Public Interest" in the U.S. Constitution. Could not find the terms 'education' or school in there either. :confused:

[drkitten]

I was unable to find the term "Public Interest" in the U.S. Constitution. Could not find the terms 'education' or school in there either.

That's because the Constitution is not self-defining and must be interpreted against the existing background of English Common Law. Cf. Marbury vs. Madison

And since education is a state/local thing, not a Federal, the U.S. Constitution is exactly the wrong place to look. I bet you didn't find the phrase "stop sign" in there, either-- but traffic regulation is also constitutional.

[ERGONER]

That's because the Constitution is not self-defining and must be interpreted ....

...Wow, I'm sure learning lots a new stuff here !
{... that self-defining stuff must be in the Preamble, cause it ain't anywhere in the Constitution itself -- and there's only one legal way to amend the Constitution}

Still waiting for your post of the "well understood" meaning of Public Interest.... and how that meaning specifically justifies compulsory education under the American system of constitutional law. :rolleyes:

[drkitten]

...Wow, I'm sure learning lots a new stuff here !

I wish you weren't being sarcastic -- it's in any secondary school civics class taught in the United States.


{... that self-defining stuff must be in the Preamble, cause it ain't anywhere in the Constitution itself -- and there's only one legal way to amend the Constitution}

There's a difference between amend and interpret.


Still waiting for your post of the "well understood" meaning of Public Interest....


Check FindLaw for yourself. Or Thomson and Gale's legal encyclopedia : "Anything affecting the rights, health, or finances of the public at large."


and how that meaning specifically justifies compulsory education under the American system of constitutional law.

Article I, section 8:

"The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes ... to ...provide for the ... general welfare of the United States."

Implicit in this is the authority to provide for the "general welfare," i.e. the common interest, under the framework of the existing Federal system.

But since compulsory education is specifically a state matter,



Amendment X

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people."

There being no Federal prohibition against compulsory education, the states have authority to set whatever educational policies they see fit.

[Hydrogen Cyanide]

Public schools are paid for through taxes, levied locally. You pay taxes to your school district, then you send your kids there to benefit from that money.......

Exactly, but not all the time.

Perhaps one of the reasons that cross-district assignments are more more feasible where I live than where the OP lives is that this state has a funding model where a good chunk of the public school expenses are at the state level. Local levies are for "extra" things, and are actually limited to a certain percentage. The reason for this funding model is so that smaller rural communities is nominally adequate.

Unfortunately the level the state provides is lacking... one of the "extra" things that must be paid through local levies is a 6th period in middle and high school. This makes for some interesting meetings with legislators (the PTA, or actually Parent Teacher Student Association is the largest school/child lobbying group in this state, notice that high school students can belong)... I went to a PTSA legislative round-table after these guys decided to approve blowing up a perfectly good stadium to build another one... and yet decide that there will be a test to graduate and still not finance education at the required level.

Also, in the case of cross-district transfers, the home district pays the district the child is attending a sort of tuition. This is especially true for special ed. program. Since larger districts like our have larger program (due to larger population) small suburban districts send certain populations here. Unfortunately, while it is a good model for truly low-population disabilities (deafness), it does not work for certain other populations. This district was getting an inordinate number of special-ed kids from outlining districts, so it upped its cross-district fee to encourage the suburban districts to create their own program.

So, strathmeyer, in your quest to go elsewhere you need to do some research. Determine how your state, county, city and or district funds their education system. Find out what the educational laws are (you should be able to access your state's regulations online). Determine if there is a difference in funding levels per student in each high school. Find out how the administration and school board works in each district, and see if there is anyway to persuade a transfer and way to get the payment completed.

Each state has different funding models, rules, regulations, requirements and other things... this is why saying that there is "one" American public school system is ridiculous.