Hmmm...interesting. So when you go to college you get a diploma and a university gets you a degree? Or is it different?

A University is a group of Colleges banded together under one name and usually, except the older, urban ones have the Colleges gathered on a large campus. ;)

OK, the University of Pennsylvania encompasses:
Annenberg School for Communication
Graduate School of Education
School of Design
Law School
School of Arts and Sciences
School of Dental Medicine
School of Engineering and Applied Science
School of Medicine
School of Nursing
School of Social Policy & Practice
School of Veterinary Medicine
Wharton School

Penn calls them schools, but each one would be a college were it to stand alone. Some Universities call them colleges, some call the departments, it's all semantics. The important part is that except for some sharing of physical facilities, they could each operate as a College of their field.
If somebody says they graduated from Penn, I have to ask what degree the got to find out what they are trained in, law degree, business degree, medical degree, engineering degree, etc. Sometimes those degrees are broken down further, like mechanical engineering as opposed to electrical engineering.
Oh yeah, bachelors, Masters and PhD, too.:bonk:

Well that's pretty much the same as it is here then. Different schools housed in the same university. Husband lectures in environmental management in the school of geography, architecture and planning, but it's part of the University of Qld. If you do hubby's course you end up with Bem which is a Bachelor of Environmental Management, not to be confused with Environmental science which is in the science school.

Each one has its own distinct admission office. One does not apply to the "University of Pennsylvania", one applies to the school of one's choice (at least at the graduate level) and is accepted or not by the school you applied to.

Canada has a system within which colleges and Universities are very different and the terms mean something completely different than they do in the states. Universities in Canada are the same as Universities in the states but colleges in Canada are more like American trade schools. In the US, a college is a "University" but with only one "school" where as American Universities have more than one school as in the University of Pennsylvania.

Also, American Universities and Colleges are either state supported or totally private. That matters inasmuch as state-supported schools must abide by non-statutory state and federal rules which can affect everything about the school whereas private Universities (such as Penn) are not bound by federal and state regulations other than the obvious statutory laws which, for example, might forbid teaching a course on overthrowing the United States Government.

The University of Minnesota calls their individual schools "colleges"
College of Liberal Arts, etc.

I was a teacher.
One of the things we make a priority is that my son goes to private school, period.
We get tax breaks for that and anyone who sends their kids to private school should.
He goes to an amazing Episcopalian school.
He begins Spanish and Mandarin, as well as math in Kindergarten.
I am an atheist.

Mandarin?

Hao bang!

I went to a Catholic school for grades 1 through 8. I could tell without a doubt that I received a better education. The teachers in 7th and 8th were very good, and I still remember my science teacher from those grades. (I believe that the teachers in my private school were paid less than other teachers in public schools, but liked the no-nonsense policies of the school. Also the money my parents spent on me to go to private school was less than what the state spent for each public school student.)

I felt that my freshman year in a public high school was a repeat of my 8th grade year at the Catholic school because everything that year just seemed very easy. (Just as a reference, I was never an exceptional student in public or private school because I would mostly get Bs and a C at times. The public high school that I went to was in a "rich" area and newly built. My class sizes at both schools were about 25 to 30 kids per class, except for special classes like PE or art.)

One example:
My freshmen year science teacher, in a public high school, was horrible. She constantly lost assignments to the point that my friend had the teacher sign a paper when he handed in assignments. He was eventually was given an A in the class because she couldn't produce his work. I personally never saw a report that I handed in at spring break and other assorted assignments. (I think she had to teach a class to be eligible to coach cheer.)

I would say that most of the teachers were good, it is just this one instance that always sticks out in my head.

One element mentioned in other posts is parent involvement. My parents always pushed me to complete every assignment and were able to help me when I needed it. Put simply, they cared about my success.

Based on my experiences in a public high school and summer school, I will try to send my kids, when I have them, to a private school for at least for the lower grade levels. To answer the question from the original post, I am not sure to what extent money should be given to private/charter schools, i.e. vouchers for only the poor or to anyone.

I simply don't trust religious-based schools to value the teaching of the child over indoctrination into the religion and brainwashing.

That is a valid reason for you not to choose a particular school. Any good school has core principles which everything is organized around. My kids' school is Catholic. Academics are pushed pretty hard, but the atmosphere is Christian in the positive sense of that word. Bullying, which is apparently the organizing principle of our local public school, is unacceptable to staff and students alike. My child (elected class rep.) is actually comfortable sitting down with our principal if she sees a problem developing. I'd like to see more alternatives in private education, but with public schools disrupting the market only religous and big dollar schools can compete.

No, taxpayer dollars should not be used to fund private education. Nor should taxpayer dollars be used to fund public education. Dismantle the failed, union-infested public school political/social influence machine.

With lay teachers paid less and Clergy teachers not paid at all, it should be cheaper to operate. But don't make the mistake of thinking the tuition your folks(and Others) paid, came close to covering the costs of operation. Most funding is not tuition.
New schools are a problem. They get hind teat when it comes to staffing because established teachers don't jump schools that often. So, you get newly graduated, disgruntled elsewhere, or transient teachers, a lot. Usually teachers do more than just teach. They get assigned all kinds of activities and in a new school that would mean getting those activities organized rather than taking over a set routine. Very time consuming stuff.
See, See, there's proof you were brainwashed.:lol:

Welcome to the Cellar, jbt. Good post.

Yes sir, nothing like a little constructive criticism to smooth the wrinkles. No wonder Spellcheck wanted to change Toymented to Tormented.;)
I'd take a wild guess that you're an anarchist? What institutions are you rethinking, or just all institutions?

Toy, tell me more about why you think unions are a problem.