Vouchers
Via tedhimself
Let me ask a question because I’m not sure I fully understand. In this example the student takes 3,000 with him and leaves $3,000 behind. If it costs $6,000 to educate the student in the first school (the one that he is leaving) then it would seem that it would cost more than the $3,000 he is taking with him to educate him in the school to which he is moving. Does the extra money come from the student’s parents?
The remainder cost gets paid by someone for a secular education that is usually parents. This is how vouchers is engineered to increase the difference in education opportunity between people of various economic means.
Now if you opt for a religious education the rest is often subsidized by the church. Indoctrination at any price is a good deal for the church and getting the state to pay for some of it is gravy. This is why 90+% of vouchers go to religious organizations. An organization that actually must operate with positive cash flow from the education business ends up still being too expensive for a voucher to help unless the parents could afford to send the child to private school without the voucher.
Net effect kids with wealthy parents engaged in the education system flee the schools and leave behind the more destitute or those whose parents aren’t engaged in their education. Those whose parents aren’t wealthy enough but are engaged in the education of their child can still get out if you’re willing to sell their child’s conscience. Thus struggling public schools are left with the most destitute students and parents disengaged from the educational process.
Parental engagement is lead indicator of most signs of educational success.
–Zafkiel