Report Inappropriate Comments

Mr.Stark, I'd concede some of your points but also would you agree that a direct comparison between public schools and private schools has to include the fact that publics have to take everyone, regardless of their ability? Private schools have the luxury of being selective in who they take. That's significant. I also find it a bit ironic that,in many cases, should a private school kid require services not offered by their school, guess who has to provide the service? The public school. Also, public schools pay for private school busing and, i think, textbooks. Some would argue that "we'll, if the publics don't provide this kind of support, then many of those kids would end up in the publics" and yet some of those same people are the ones who bash the publics any chance they can. I'd like to call their bluff. Let privates pay for their own busing, textbooks etc. publics will always ave a more difficult time than the privates - especially in urban areas. Charters can help there and they should but also remember that charters can take kid with 'problems' and once they get the state funding for that child, they can send that kid back to the public school and guess what? - they get to keep that funding while the public gets the kid back without the funding! I'm all for fair play but that reeks. Competition does work but its not a panacea that will magically solve all of the public school issues. Vouchers sound great and in areas they've been instiuted there have been successes and failures.

From: If a decision had been made, why was a committee needed?

Please explain the inappropriate content below.