Republicans to target unions, expand school choice in states

[jc456]

Class size has a LOT to do with it. In fact, earlier in this thread I quoted an article that listed the 5 main reasons parents chose private schools and smaller class size was at the top of the list. How can one teacher effectively teach a class of 60 fifth graders? You're arguing against exactly what makes private schools successful. We need more teachers.

The reason I argue against that is because I went to a private school. This was during the baby boom era, and we had 39 kids in my class. I'd match that class against any public school that had much smaller class sizes.

Smaller classes is a union thing. They are not looking out for the kids, they are looking out for themselves. Perhaps some parents bought into that as well, I don't know. Smaller classes may help with an out of control room of kids perhaps, but that's about it.

Have you ever taught a class with 39 kids; I have. In such an environment, kids that need any extra help don't get. There is not enough class time to cover the material and have any interaction with the kids. Most teachers in that environment, hardly even know their students. On parent teacher night, a parent wants to discuss the problem Johnny is having in math and you can't remember which Johnny is their son. Thankfully, I only had to spend two years teaching in the zoo. Frankly, I wish every parent had the opportunity to teach an overloaded class of 3rd graders.

In private schools, larger class sizes may well be tolerable since the school has the opportunity to select their students, no special ed kids, no juvenile delinquents, no kids that can't speak English, no kids that are 3 grade levels behind. Public schools have to take whatever walks in the door.

Then maybe get rid of all teachers and hire nuns. They seemed to have no problem with it.

Typical response from a conservative, fix education by getting rid of the teachers.

sounds good to me

 

[aris2chat]

My son excelled in a charter school and is now an engineer. My 1 st daughter was entered into a charter school starting g kindergarten and was reading three grades above her class level in 1st grade.

Sent from my YD206 using USMessageBoard.com mobile app

 

[Flopper]

Class size has a LOT to do with it. In fact, earlier in this thread I quoted an article that listed the 5 main reasons parents chose private schools and smaller class size was at the top of the list. How can one teacher effectively teach a class of 60 fifth graders? You're arguing against exactly what makes private schools successful. We need more teachers.

The reason I argue against that is because I went to a private school. This was during the baby boom era, and we had 39 kids in my class. I'd match that class against any public school that had much smaller class sizes.

Smaller classes is a union thing. They are not looking out for the kids, they are looking out for themselves. Perhaps some parents bought into that as well, I don't know. Smaller classes may help with an out of control room of kids perhaps, but that's about it.

Not necessarily. Firstly it depends on what you're studying. Some subjects can be done with larger class sizes, others are done better with smaller. Languages for example are better done with less kids.
Sometimes you have kids who are out of control, and they need to be taught. In private school you're going to have kids who behave or the school will kick them out. When you get to the bottom it's harder to kick such kids out. Generally kids with learning difficulties need more attention and therefore smaller class sizes.

why are you okay with a child interfering with another child's time in school? If a child misbehaves, kick them out. WTF. Why are you for allowing mischief in class to disrupt the majority? Wow.

The larger the class size, particularly in elementary school the more disruptions you have and the harder it is to control the class. Kicking kids out of school should be a last resort. It may solve the problem of class discipline but creates another problem that may well be much worst.

 

[jc456]

Class size has a LOT to do with it. In fact, earlier in this thread I quoted an article that listed the 5 main reasons parents chose private schools and smaller class size was at the top of the list. How can one teacher effectively teach a class of 60 fifth graders? You're arguing against exactly what makes private schools successful. We need more teachers.

The reason I argue against that is because I went to a private school. This was during the baby boom era, and we had 39 kids in my class. I'd match that class against any public school that had much smaller class sizes.

Smaller classes is a union thing. They are not looking out for the kids, they are looking out for themselves. Perhaps some parents bought into that as well, I don't know. Smaller classes may help with an out of control room of kids perhaps, but that's about it.

Not necessarily. Firstly it depends on what you're studying. Some subjects can be done with larger class sizes, others are done better with smaller. Languages for example are better done with less kids.
Sometimes you have kids who are out of control, and they need to be taught. In private school you're going to have kids who behave or the school will kick them out. When you get to the bottom it's harder to kick such kids out. Generally kids with learning difficulties need more attention and therefore smaller class sizes.

why are you okay with a child interfering with another child's time in school? If a child misbehaves, kick them out. WTF. Why are you for allowing mischief in class to disrupt the majority? Wow.

The larger the class size, particularly in elementary school the more disruptions you have and the harder it is to control the class. Kicking kids out of school should be a last resort. It may solve the problem of class discipline but creates another problem that may well be much worst.

a kid who is a quality student should not have to suffer from kids who misbehave. end of story. the will of the many is greater than the misbehavior of the one.

 

[Flopper]

My son excelled in a charter school and is now an engineer. My 1 st daughter was entered into a charter school starting g kindergarten and was reading three grades above her class level in 1st grade.

Sent from my YD206 using USMessageBoard.com mobile app

In choosing a charter school, it's critical that a parent match the school to the child because there are huge differences in charter school, much more so than in public schools. There is a wide array of charter school types. Charter schools may be specialized, either as to their program focus such as a STEM academy or students served such as prior drop-outs, though many simply serve mainstream populations with a distinct academic approach. There are charter schools in all sorts of settings – rural, urban, and suburban and even online charter schools providing distance-learning opportunities. Some charter schools operate as neighborhood schools, having turned-around or converted traditional district schools. I have seen charter schools that specialize in teaching homeless children, ESL students, and Special Ed. Like private schools and public schools, they can be very good or very bad.

Charter schools are the answer for some parents but not all. Only about 3% of the students across the country attend charter schools. California has the largest enrollment, 8%.

 

[Flopper]

Class size has a LOT to do with it. In fact, earlier in this thread I quoted an article that listed the 5 main reasons parents chose private schools and smaller class size was at the top of the list. How can one teacher effectively teach a class of 60 fifth graders? You're arguing against exactly what makes private schools successful. We need more teachers.

The reason I argue against that is because I went to a private school. This was during the baby boom era, and we had 39 kids in my class. I'd match that class against any public school that had much smaller class sizes.

Smaller classes is a union thing. They are not looking out for the kids, they are looking out for themselves. Perhaps some parents bought into that as well, I don't know. Smaller classes may help with an out of control room of kids perhaps, but that's about it.

Not necessarily. Firstly it depends on what you're studying. Some subjects can be done with larger class sizes, others are done better with smaller. Languages for example are better done with less kids.
Sometimes you have kids who are out of control, and they need to be taught. In private school you're going to have kids who behave or the school will kick them out. When you get to the bottom it's harder to kick such kids out. Generally kids with learning difficulties need more attention and therefore smaller class sizes.

why are you okay with a child interfering with another child's time in school? If a child misbehaves, kick them out. WTF. Why are you for allowing mischief in class to disrupt the majority? Wow.

The larger the class size, particularly in elementary school the more disruptions you have and the harder it is to control the class. Kicking kids out of school should be a last resort. It may solve the problem of class discipline but creates another problem that may well be much worst.

a kid who is a quality student should not have to suffer from kids who misbehave. end of story. the will of the many is greater than the misbehavior of the one.

My experience has been that top students do well regardless of how disruptive other students are. It is the poorer students that suffer the most.

The biggest mistake we make in dealing with social problems is we don't really fix the problem, and often don't even try. We just pass it along and it gets worst and causes more problems as the child grows older. It's far better to deal with the problem in it's infancy than as an adult when it is often a hopeless situation.

 

[jc456]

The reason I argue against that is because I went to a private school. This was during the baby boom era, and we had 39 kids in my class. I'd match that class against any public school that had much smaller class sizes.

Smaller classes is a union thing. They are not looking out for the kids, they are looking out for themselves. Perhaps some parents bought into that as well, I don't know. Smaller classes may help with an out of control room of kids perhaps, but that's about it.

Not necessarily. Firstly it depends on what you're studying. Some subjects can be done with larger class sizes, others are done better with smaller. Languages for example are better done with less kids.
Sometimes you have kids who are out of control, and they need to be taught. In private school you're going to have kids who behave or the school will kick them out. When you get to the bottom it's harder to kick such kids out. Generally kids with learning difficulties need more attention and therefore smaller class sizes.

why are you okay with a child interfering with another child's time in school? If a child misbehaves, kick them out. WTF. Why are you for allowing mischief in class to disrupt the majority? Wow.

The larger the class size, particularly in elementary school the more disruptions you have and the harder it is to control the class. Kicking kids out of school should be a last resort. It may solve the problem of class discipline but creates another problem that may well be much worst.

a kid who is a quality student should not have to suffer from kids who misbehave. end of story. the will of the many is greater than the misbehavior of the one.

My experience has been that top students do well regardless of how disruptive other students are. It is the poorer students that suffer the most.

The biggest mistake we make in dealing with social problems is we don't really fix the problem, and often don't even try. We just pass it along and it gets worst and causes more problems as the child grows older. It's far better to deal with the problem in it's infancy than as an adult when it is often a hopeless situation.

that may be so, but it still isn't about the misbehaved ones, it is about the majority. And the will of the majority outweighs the brat of the one.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

My son excelled in a charter school and is now an engineer. My 1 st daughter was entered into a charter school starting g kindergarten and was reading three grades above her class level in 1st grade.

Sent from my YD206 using USMessageBoard.com mobile app

In choosing a charter school, it's critical that a parent match the school to the child because there are huge differences in charter school, much more so than in public schools. There is a wide array of charter school types. Charter schools may be specialized, either as to their program focus such as a STEM academy or students served such as prior drop-outs, though many simply serve mainstream populations with a distinct academic approach. There are charter schools in all sorts of settings – rural, urban, and suburban and even online charter schools providing distance-learning opportunities. Some charter schools operate as neighborhood schools, having turned-around or converted traditional district schools. I have seen charter schools that specialize in teaching homeless children, ESL students, and Special Ed. Like private schools and public schools, they can be very good or very bad.

Charter schools are the answer for some parents but not all. Only about 3% of the students across the country attend charter schools. California has the largest enrollment, 8%.

Perhaps, but vouchers are not limited to just charter schools. Some use religious schools and others use their vouchers for a different public school in an area where they don't live.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Class size has a LOT to do with it. In fact, earlier in this thread I quoted an article that listed the 5 main reasons parents chose private schools and smaller class size was at the top of the list. How can one teacher effectively teach a class of 60 fifth graders? You're arguing against exactly what makes private schools successful. We need more teachers.

The reason I argue against that is because I went to a private school. This was during the baby boom era, and we had 39 kids in my class. I'd match that class against any public school that had much smaller class sizes.

Smaller classes is a union thing. They are not looking out for the kids, they are looking out for themselves. Perhaps some parents bought into that as well, I don't know. Smaller classes may help with an out of control room of kids perhaps, but that's about it.

Have you ever taught a class with 39 kids; I have. In such an environment, kids that need any extra help don't get. There is not enough class time to cover the material and have any interaction with the kids. Most teachers in that environment, hardly even know their students. On parent teacher night, a parent wants to discuss the problem Johnny is having in math and you can't remember which Johnny is their son. Thankfully, I only had to spend two years teaching in the zoo. Frankly, I wish every parent had the opportunity to teach an overloaded class of 3rd graders.

In private schools, larger class sizes may well be tolerable since the school has the opportunity to select their students, no special ed kids, no juvenile delinquents, no kids that can't speak English, no kids that are 3 grade levels behind. Public schools have to take whatever walks in the door.

Then maybe get rid of all teachers and hire nuns. They seemed to have no problem with it.

Typical response from a conservative, fix education by getting rid of the teachers.

Yep, the teachers that can't do the job.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

The reason I argue against that is because I went to a private school. This was during the baby boom era, and we had 39 kids in my class. I'd match that class against any public school that had much smaller class sizes.

Smaller classes is a union thing. They are not looking out for the kids, they are looking out for themselves. Perhaps some parents bought into that as well, I don't know. Smaller classes may help with an out of control room of kids perhaps, but that's about it.

Have you ever taught a class with 39 kids; I have. In such an environment, kids that need any extra help don't get. There is not enough class time to cover the material and have any interaction with the kids. Most teachers in that environment, hardly even know their students. On parent teacher night, a parent wants to discuss the problem Johnny is having in math and you can't remember which Johnny is their son. Thankfully, I only had to spend two years teaching in the zoo. Frankly, I wish every parent had the opportunity to teach an overloaded class of 3rd graders.

In private schools, larger class sizes may well be tolerable since the school has the opportunity to select their students, no special ed kids, no juvenile delinquents, no kids that can't speak English, no kids that are 3 grade levels behind. Public schools have to take whatever walks in the door.

why don't you extend the class times then? why are you against an eight hour class schedule?

Extending school hours will do nothing. If you have 30+ kids in the class it is impossible to help all especially if you don't have an assistant. Smaller classrooms are the key to quality education. Especially the younger they are.

that's merely a cop out. Then the class schedule is bad. The teacher is then bad. dude, why is it majorities can learn in the environment and minorities don't seem to? Extra time gives the ability to go to those who need help right?

Ok. So how about you teach a class of 30+ 1st graders and see how easy it is.

Class size needs to be smaller. Not hours extended. High school students may be able to handle an eight hour school day but definitely not elementary and middle schoolers.

Why not? When I was in elementary and middle school, we had the same hours as high schoolers.

 

[Wyatt earp]

If you give a poor kid a voucher, it doesn't fix all the other problems.

The other end of it is that school choice usually means that the charter or private school cherry picks the kids they want. I went to Catholic Schools in the 1970's. You know what happened to the kids who were trouble makers, who had learning disabilities, etc.

They got fobbed off on the public schools.

So, no, taking money from the Public Schools and giving them to private schools doesn't really fix the problem.

You hit the nail on the head.


Immigrant children excel in the same public school American children have but the difference is their parents instill the importance of education in them. They don't allow their kids to bring home Cs.

Conservatives don't how important the public school education is. The focus should be on bettering them. In Finland their teachers are treated like doctors. They have to have masters degrees and education is give top priority in terms of budget.

Yeah it was so cool to see Finland land a man on the moon and all the so many more inventions they had then the U.S.A.

 

[bodecea]

If you give a poor kid a voucher, it doesn't fix all the other problems.

The other end of it is that school choice usually means that the charter or private school cherry picks the kids they want. I went to Catholic Schools in the 1970's. You know what happened to the kids who were trouble makers, who had learning disabilities, etc.

They got fobbed off on the public schools.

So, no, taking money from the Public Schools and giving them to private schools doesn't really fix the problem.

You hit the nail on the head.


Immigrant children excel in the same public school American children have but the difference is their parents instill the importance of education in them. They don't allow their kids to bring home Cs.

Conservatives don't how important the public school education is. The focus should be on bettering them. In Finland their teachers are treated like doctors. They have to have masters degrees and education is give top priority in terms of budget.

Yeah it was so cool to see Finland land a man on the moon and all the so many more inventions they had then the U.S.A.

And yet....they are being held up as having a better education system than the U.S.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

So she should (and did) pay for other people's kids to go to public school and then pay for private school for her kids? Where is the equity in that?

I say that if my sister paid for her kids education, all parents should pay for their kids education as well. That's fair.

Or we could just eliminate private schools and put the kids of the rich right next to the kids of the poor. I'll bet you those leaky roofs and old textbooks get fixed pretty quickly after that.

There's the problem right there: the kids of the poor. Maybe the solution is for poor people not to have any kids.

 

[Wyatt earp]

If you give a poor kid a voucher, it doesn't fix all the other problems.

The other end of it is that school choice usually means that the charter or private school cherry picks the kids they want. I went to Catholic Schools in the 1970's. You know what happened to the kids who were trouble makers, who had learning disabilities, etc.

They got fobbed off on the public schools.

So, no, taking money from the Public Schools and giving them to private schools doesn't really fix the problem.

You hit the nail on the head.


Immigrant children excel in the same public school American children have but the difference is their parents instill the importance of education in them. They don't allow their kids to bring home Cs.

Conservatives don't how important the public school education is. The focus should be on bettering them. In Finland their teachers are treated like doctors. They have to have masters degrees and education is give top priority in terms of budget.

Yeah it was so cool to see Finland land a man on the moon and all the so many more inventions they had then the U.S.A.

And yet....they are being held up as having a better education system than the U.S.

And yet they pay 80% in taxes... Sounds like no one taught them economics or street smarts


.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

The reason I argue against that is because I went to a private school. This was during the baby boom era, and we had 39 kids in my class. I'd match that class against any public school that had much smaller class sizes.

Smaller classes is a union thing. They are not looking out for the kids, they are looking out for themselves. Perhaps some parents bought into that as well, I don't know. Smaller classes may help with an out of control room of kids perhaps, but that's about it.

And how many of those 39 kids had learning disabilities? I went to a similar private school in the same era, and you know what, all those retarded kids where picked up by a public school bus and driven off to a public school where they were separated from the rest.

How many of those kids had disciplinary problems? Probably none. Of course, they let the nuns beat them. That was a great system. As in totally fucked up.

Yep, but nobody messed with those nuns I'll tell you. It was a privilege to be in a private school and unruly kids would have gotten kicked out. But I only remember one to be totally honest.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

When Obama was first elected, one of the first things he the unions did was to target School Vouchers. Shit, Obama was correct......Elections do have consequences.

Yep, he certainly got rid of them in Washington anyhow.

Well, that and the fact they didn't work and didn't improve education in the district.

I bet it didn't hurt it either. Or.......maybe the real reason: because DumBama wants to keep that union money coming into the Democrat party.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

But none of those things should be factors. If the black and white guy did the SAME crime, they should get the same prison sentence. Not "The White Guy dressed nicely, he must be totally innocent."

You see, you are going through a lot of trouble to deny what even you know is true.. The "Justice" system has no "Justice" if you are black.

No, a judge takes everything into account. If you want judges to be robotic, then we don't need human judges; just a machine where you type in the crime and it spits out a sentence.

Judges know the difference between a lifelong troublemaker and somebody that may have made one mistake in their lives. That's why you need judges. How a person behaves in court is a reflection of how they respect law and order. Judges want to keep troublemakers in prison because they know as soon as they get out, they will be robbing, mugging, assaulting, and breaking into homes again. They also don't want to lock up a person that made a mistake for a long time so they don't become career criminals when they get out.

Unlikely... but even if they did, they should have asked for a complete copy of his personnel file...

Why, because the person on the phone may be lying?

What you don't understand is that a current employer has to be very cautious in their references. If you know somebody in your inhuman resources department, just ask them. Saying the wrong thing can get you sued. That's how I learned. I worked for employers that did get sued for things like that.

An independent body with no connection to the police.

Like who? In some cases, the family of the criminal hires their own people and in all cases I'm aware of, they didn't find anything different than the police investigators.

 

[Flopper]

My son excelled in a charter school and is now an engineer. My 1 st daughter was entered into a charter school starting g kindergarten and was reading three grades above her class level in 1st grade.

Sent from my YD206 using USMessageBoard.com mobile app

In choosing a charter school, it's critical that a parent match the school to the child because there are huge differences in charter school, much more so than in public schools. There is a wide array of charter school types. Charter schools may be specialized, either as to their program focus such as a STEM academy or students served such as prior drop-outs, though many simply serve mainstream populations with a distinct academic approach. There are charter schools in all sorts of settings – rural, urban, and suburban and even online charter schools providing distance-learning opportunities. Some charter schools operate as neighborhood schools, having turned-around or converted traditional district schools. I have seen charter schools that specialize in teaching homeless children, ESL students, and Special Ed. Like private schools and public schools, they can be very good or very bad.

Charter schools are the answer for some parents but not all. Only about 3% of the students across the country attend charter schools. California has the largest enrollment, 8%.

Perhaps, but vouchers are not limited to just charter schools. Some use religious schools and others use their vouchers for a different public school in an area where they don't live.

That all depends on state laws.
Voucher programs give parents a choice that they would not have otherwise but do they improve education?
In the 5 states with highest test scores in public schools, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Maine, New Jersey, and Vermont, only Vermont has a voucher program. The 5 states with the lowest test scores in public schools, New Mexico, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, and West Virginia, only Louisiana and Mississippi have voucher programs. None of these states with voucher programs shows any significant improvement in test scores over public schools in those states.

Looking at the 13 states that have voucher programs, areas in which test scores are in the bottom quartile, students on vouchers scored 5% higher than those in public schools. However, those in top two quartiles scored higher in public schools.

Bottom line is that voucher programs give parents a choice. In really bad schools, students can do better with vouchers, if the parents pick the right schools. However, in really good public schools, kids do better than than those on vouchers.
http://public-schools.startclass.com/stories/13054/states-ranked-test-scores#1-New-Mexico

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

My son excelled in a charter school and is now an engineer. My 1 st daughter was entered into a charter school starting g kindergarten and was reading three grades above her class level in 1st grade.

Sent from my YD206 using USMessageBoard.com mobile app

In choosing a charter school, it's critical that a parent match the school to the child because there are huge differences in charter school, much more so than in public schools. There is a wide array of charter school types. Charter schools may be specialized, either as to their program focus such as a STEM academy or students served such as prior drop-outs, though many simply serve mainstream populations with a distinct academic approach. There are charter schools in all sorts of settings – rural, urban, and suburban and even online charter schools providing distance-learning opportunities. Some charter schools operate as neighborhood schools, having turned-around or converted traditional district schools. I have seen charter schools that specialize in teaching homeless children, ESL students, and Special Ed. Like private schools and public schools, they can be very good or very bad.

Charter schools are the answer for some parents but not all. Only about 3% of the students across the country attend charter schools. California has the largest enrollment, 8%.

Perhaps, but vouchers are not limited to just charter schools. Some use religious schools and others use their vouchers for a different public school in an area where they don't live.

That all depends on state laws.
Voucher programs give parents a choice that they would not have otherwise but do they improve education?
In the 5 states with highest test scores in public schools, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Maine, New Jersey, and Vermont, only Vermont has a voucher program. The 5 states with the lowest test scores in public schools, New Mexico, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, and West Virginia, only Louisiana and Mississippi have voucher programs. None of these states with voucher programs shows any significant improvement in test scores over public schools in those states.

Looking at the 13 states that have voucher programs, areas in which test scores are in the bottom quartile, students on vouchers scored 5% higher than those in public schools. However, those in top two quartiles scored higher in public schools.

Bottom line is that voucher programs give parents a choice. In really bad schools, students can do better with vouchers, if the parents pick the right schools. However, in really good public schools, kids do better than than those on vouchers.
http://public-schools.startclass.com/stories/13054/states-ranked-test-scores#1-New-Mexico

However as I posted earlier, you have more graduates from private school (with vouchers) than public schools. That's an accomplishment right there if you had a chid failing in the public school.

 

[Flopper]

My son excelled in a charter school and is now an engineer. My 1 st daughter was entered into a charter school starting g kindergarten and was reading three grades above her class level in 1st grade.

Sent from my YD206 using USMessageBoard.com mobile app

In choosing a charter school, it's critical that a parent match the school to the child because there are huge differences in charter school, much more so than in public schools. There is a wide array of charter school types. Charter schools may be specialized, either as to their program focus such as a STEM academy or students served such as prior drop-outs, though many simply serve mainstream populations with a distinct academic approach. There are charter schools in all sorts of settings – rural, urban, and suburban and even online charter schools providing distance-learning opportunities. Some charter schools operate as neighborhood schools, having turned-around or converted traditional district schools. I have seen charter schools that specialize in teaching homeless children, ESL students, and Special Ed. Like private schools and public schools, they can be very good or very bad.

Charter schools are the answer for some parents but not all. Only about 3% of the students across the country attend charter schools. California has the largest enrollment, 8%.

Perhaps, but vouchers are not limited to just charter schools. Some use religious schools and others use their vouchers for a different public school in an area where they don't live.

That all depends on state laws.
Voucher programs give parents a choice that they would not have otherwise but do they improve education?
In the 5 states with highest test scores in public schools, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Maine, New Jersey, and Vermont, only Vermont has a voucher program. The 5 states with the lowest test scores in public schools, New Mexico, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, and West Virginia, only Louisiana and Mississippi have voucher programs. None of these states with voucher programs shows any significant improvement in test scores over public schools in those states.

Looking at the 13 states that have voucher programs, areas in which test scores are in the bottom quartile, students on vouchers scored 5% higher than those in public schools. However, those in top two quartiles scored higher in public schools.

Bottom line is that voucher programs give parents a choice. In really bad schools, students can do better with vouchers, if the parents pick the right schools. However, in really good public schools, kids do better than than those on vouchers.
http://public-schools.startclass.com/stories/13054/states-ranked-test-scores#1-New-Mexico

However as I posted earlier, you have more graduates from private school (with vouchers) than public schools. That's an accomplishment right there if you had a chid failing in the public school.

That seems a bit hard to believe since only 13 states have voucher programs. The state that issues the most vouchers is California with only 8% of the students receiving vouchers.