Should taxpayer dollars be used to fund private education?

[Happy Monkey]

Originally Posted by tw

Will making class sized smaller solve all problems?

Nothing would solve all problems.

Making class size smaller would solve some problems. If class size were irrelevant, then there would be lecture halls in elementary schools.

[tw]

Originally Posted by Happy Monkey

Making class size smaller would solve some problems. If class size were irrelevant, then there would be lecture halls in elementary schools.

And again, I am the one criticizing that proposal for reasons after reasons - including no numbers. Using exactly what they posted, then this statement agrees with what they said: "Class sizes should be 3 students per teacher to solve education problems". Did they post anything to the contrary? No. Did we not learn from George Jr who also promoted wish-washy solutions using same reasoning?

Meanwhile we have lecture halls in elementary schools. They are rooms with desks for 30 kids.

How many posted based upon myths that private schools are better? Why did I let this thread go so far before finally posting facts? I waited for someone to discuss from reality rather than from assumptions - post numbers. No numbers means junk science was being used.

For every study that says class sizes of 15 is better, another study takes the same facts to prove 30 is just as sufficient. It is a wash no different than electric fields created cancer in kids. It is arguing over WMDs because they must exist rather than first asking some damning questions, demanding numbers, and addressing the problem.

Why did Saddam have WMDs? Because he had to make everyone believe that lie. No one bothered to first address the problem; therefore knew Saddam must have WMDs for the same reason that smaller class sizes must work. Work? Work to solve what? What is this problem that smaller class sizes miraculously solves? Why was the education system so much better back when class sized averaged 30 per teacher? What changed? Again, when do we define the problem before (instead) imposing solutions?

Again, based upon what others have posted, they want 3 students per teacher? Why did they not post a number? That is the first symptom of junk science alive and well. It is a 'feel good' solution; therefore it must be right. This is what Rush Limbaugh and George Jr did to promote 'No child left behind'. When do we first define the problem?

Did anybody learn this lesson from a liar named George Jr? Why so many solutions without even defining the problem?

[Happy Monkey]

Originally Posted by tw

Meanwhile we have lecture halls in elementary schools. They are rooms with desks for 30 kids.

That's a classroom. A lecture hall holds over 100 (and 100 would be a small one), and is generally encountered for the first time in college.

Originally Posted by tw

For every study that says class sizes of 15 is better, another study takes the same facts to prove 30 is just as sufficient.

Or, how about 45? Why not 60?

[tw]

Originally Posted by Happy Monkey

That's a classroom. A lecture hall holds over 100 (and 100 would be a small one), and is generally encountered for the first time in college.Or, how about 45? Why not 60?

Exactly my point. Where were their numbers? What is the difference between a 30 person lecture hall and a classroom constructed for 5 students? Well, so many are posting declarations that a smaller class size means a better education - and did not post numbers. So yes, a class of 30 is better than a lecture hall of 100. We can easily make both cases because why? No numbers were provided with a claim that smaller classes are better? Same tricks were used to prove Saddam must have had weapons of mass destruction.

The OPs post asked about financing private schools. I am still asking why - a question still not answered? But then this is exactly how Rush Limbaugh lies are spun into political agendas. Others just assumed private school meant better education. Why? No one posted a number until that 15 July NY Times article. No wonder Rush Limbaugh still has listeners. The shortage of analytical questioning - the shortage of doubters - is mountainous. Smaller class sized are 'proven' for superior education? The classic popular perception - rather than hard facts .... the numbers.

So why do we finance private schools with taxpayer money? Our education systems are too good? We need to dumb down the kids? Since the problem was not defined and since the NY Times article provided facts, then apparently kids are being too well educated. A completely logical conclusion when a problem is based on assumptions. Why should taxpayers finance private schools that don't provide a superior education? Only one reason is logical - we must dumb down the kids.

Curiously, only Happy Monkey and tw have even put forth numbers for a 'large' and 'smaller' classroom? Why did so many previous posters assumed private schools have superior education? Does popular myth mean it is a fact? I am mystified that products of this education system could let 'Saddam has WMDs' logic be used again.

This never was a rhetorical question. What is the problem to be solved in the OP's original post? Anyone. Not just Luisa. Anyone who posted. What is the problem being solved by funding private schools?

[Happy Monkey]

Originally Posted by tw

Exactly my point. Where were their numbers? What is the difference between a 30 person lecture hall and a classroom constructed for 5 students?

The amount of attention the teacher can pay to the students.

[xoxoxoBruce]

I don't need quantified studies to know a class size of 15 is better than 30, because I've had and lived with both.

15 - The teachers answers ever question. By hearing all questions can find out what they're not communicating clearly and change methods.
30 - The teacher will answer 4 or 5 questions and move on. If your question wasn't covered, too bad.

15 - The teacher has more interaction, can observes more closely each student's work
30 - The teacher can't even see what many of the students have on their desk, no less keep track of each students feedback. Much easier for the kid to skate.

15 - The teachers have time to really read papers and evaluate content.
30 - The teachers can only scan papers, catch spelling and punctuation errors, but not enough time to really Analyze content.

Simple logic would tell you the same thing. Any time there are numbers, there's someone with an agenda behind them. The agenda may be benevolent, but it's there, because people don't compile this stuff for a hobby.
Even if they did, they wouldn't have access to the information in most cases. Oh, and the people supplying the information have their agenda too.
Be careful of simple numbers, they're never simple.

[yesman065]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

Be careful of simple numbers, they're never simple.

Your numbers made it pretty clear and simple, kinda logical too.

[tw]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

I don't need quantified studies to know a class size of 15 is better than 30, because I've had and lived with both.

15 - The teachers answers ever question. By hearing all questions can find out what they're not communicating clearly and change methods.
30 - The teacher will answer 4 or 5 questions and move on. If your question wasn't covered, too bad. ...

Why are your teachers all so incompetent? My best classes were the larger ones - 30. And those teachers never had problem answering all questions. But then xoxoxoBruce cites speculations as facts. Where xoxoxoBruce do you post by citing facts? Your numbers are classic speculation.

Some of my worst classes were 3, 5 and 10 students. That fact trumps speculation that xoxoxoBruce has posted. To make a point, xoxoxoBruce, instead, must provide peer reviewed studies. He does not. In fact this discussion automatically assumed private school education is superior - twisting the same speculation into a fact.

Meanwhile, xoxoxoBruces numbers are wrong. Replace 400 with 30; appreciate his typographical error. Yes, xoxoxoBruce, anyone can just arbitrarily post numbers as facts. Meanwhile, xoxoxoBruce’s conclusion – all classes should be reduced to one student – He fogets to mention that fact from *his sources*. But I mock.

There is no proof that classes of 15 means a superior education. There are studies that contradict - a wash. Most glaring assumption from that same spin - that private schools are superior education. Why would a teacher not be able to serve 30 students? 85% of all problems are directly traceable to the top person. During the baby boom, education was superior when class sizes were frequently 30 students.

Again, there are times when a smaller class size is necessary - ie autism. So that proves all large classes do not provide superior education? Nonsense.