Re: Vouchers lost in court, deserve no new chance

Bob LeChevalier wrote:
Pubkeybreaker wrote:
> >> That is, private schools truly are Lake Woebegon, where all children
ar=
e
> >> above average.Voucherswill do one of two things. Either it will
acceler=
ate
> >> this affect, because if private schools are allowed to keep their
admis=
sions
> >> criteria, they'll =A0then be able to just take the top, say, 20%
instea=
d of
> >> the top 40%, or they'll lose many of the reasons parents want to send
t=
hem
> >> there.
Flat false. Some independent schools today specialize in the care of
severe sp-ed students. Why not suppose that schools would specialize
in various dimensions (curriculum, theory of learning, religion, etc)?
Likely, unless regulations impose uniformity, you'll see increasing
product differentation. Why suppose that schools will turn away poor
performers? Some schools would specialize in enhancing these. Most
grocery stores allow incompetent cooks to buy steak to take home and
burn.

(PKB): "Yep!!!!! =A0And as for "allowed to keep", =A0I don't see how they
can be
prohibited from having such criteria."

(Bob): "Ever heard of the 14th amendment "equal protection under the
law"?

"Equal protection" considerations currently do not bar selective
government schools (Stuyvesant High, Bronx Science), so it's unlikely
that they'd apply to independent schools in a voucher regime.

(Bob): "All they have to do is say that a school must meet certain
conditions to be eligible for vouchers. =A0One of those conditions could
be non-restrictive admissions."

That's one way to kill a voucher program.

(Bob): "There are school qualifications in the Milwaukee voucher
program."

Which make the results of the Milwaukee program only marginally
applicable to estimates of a competitive market in education
services.