Moving to cleveland without a plan

marina

Tue, Apr 17 2018, 10:46 am

here's an example of a community member's view on the how the voucher system affects the school system. And she's being very polite about it, many people are much angrier.

http://www.heightsobserver.org.....ation

Quote:

Vouchers, as noted, by and large support religious education. Last year, all but seven of the 273 students who used an Edchoice voucher to attend a private school attended a religious school. Almost half the students were in kindergarten and had never spent one day in public school. This year the number of EdChoice students increased to 483, and, once again, all but seven of these students attended a religious school. It’s questionable if they are providing public school children more options or simply subsidizing people's existing plans to give their children a religious education—a choice our education tradition has always allowed, but not at public expense.

amother

Lilac

Tue, Apr 17 2018, 10:48 am

amother wrote:

Tuition is around $10,000. If you live in University Heights or Beachwood you are eligible for vouchers for $4,500 per kid, starting in Kindergarten (Pre-1a or Primary in the tristate area). So you would still owe the schools around 22,000.... One other important factor, in lakewood kids can go to playgroup until 2pm for $220 a month until 4 year olds. Here all 4 year olds and most 3 year olds are in school. There are not vouchers for them (unless you work certain amount of hours and are income eligible. It's a different type of voucher.) and tuition is $6000 a year until 1:50pm...

I'm talking about income based vouchers, which the way I understand it will be free in the case that I mentioned.

amother

Firebrick

Tue, Apr 17 2018, 11:38 am

amother wrote:

there are play groups for 3 year olds. (University heights $275. A month) There might be one playgroup for 4 year olds in Cleveland heights. Pretty much Only in Lakewood do they have kindergarten / pre-k playgroups.

Mommyg8

Tue, Apr 17 2018, 12:14 pm

marina wrote:

Quote:

I just skimmed through the article, and I'm not getting your point. Of course school vouchers take away money from public schools, and in other news, water is wet.

The issue, as I understand it, is that public schools are often top heavy with bloated administrative expenses and other useless expenditures, while our education on a national level lags behind most other first world countries. Segregation is still a problem, as the public schools In black inner city neighborhoods are doing particularly badly. In other words, we are not getting our moneys worth with the educational system we have now, and this is something that should be addressed. By pouring more and more money into the public schools, you are really adding a bigger lump to the carpet.

Its nice that the frum community is benefiting from the voucher program, but that's just a side point, as nationally we are just a tiny minority.

One minute, don't vouchers help schools hire better teachers and have a better secular program? Isn't that what you said you wanted?

Kiwi13

Tue, Apr 17 2018, 12:33 pm

Mommyg8 wrote:

I see this both ways. The vouchers are great in the sense that they give more choice to families when it comes to pursuing quality education. That issue however invites the debate about the purpose of the public school system altogether, and whether things need to change across the board.

On the other hand, the CH/UH public school system is a train wreck and has been for years. It hit a breaking point a few years ago and at least one of the schools completely shut down. Vouchers were introduced as a short term solution until the schools could be fixed long term. The problem is that the schools have some major, fundamental problems. And personally I don't think that the school levies are ever going to fix this specific school district as things stand now, it's like throwing money down a black hole. There needs to be a thorough restructuring, and maybe that's being done, maybe not, I don't know and I've been out of the loop for a long time now. I do see the problem of people coming in droves from out of town and "draining" the system. Yes you will pay taxes but it's really not the same thing when you purposely come to take advantage of a failing system. It does put added strain on the area, and it does lower public opinion of the frum community. I'm not saying that you shouldn't do it, like I said everybody needs to put their own family first, but it isn't exactly right to say that this is an ideal situation, because it's not. I believe it does hamper the district's ability to get back on track when the population becomes invested in its failure.

The real argument here, as I see it, is whether public school vs. vouchers should be up for debate everywhere. Does it work? Does it create better educational opportunities? Does it clean up crime, raise graduation rates, lower unemployment...?

amother

Firebrick

Tue, Apr 17 2018, 12:46 pm

Marina I don’t think it’s fair to assume that those doing “a” are also doing “b”.

As an aside, the reason why I feel like it’s ok to use vouchers even though it takes money from the public schools is because their budget is horribly bloated, and they are doing an awful job educating children. Whenever I see reports on salaries and performance, I feel like vouchers are justified and will hopefully compel the districts to do a better job.
Basically - I don’t feel like I’m taking money from children’s education - I feel like I’m taking money from administrators etc.

Mommyg8

Tue, Apr 17 2018, 8:24 pm

Kiwi13 wrote:

I wasn't really commenting on Cleveland's personal politics, as I don't live there Smile

. I was commenting on the article that marina posted.

I can't see a downside to vouchers (I'm not talking about our community, I'm talking about the general population). Competition can only be a good thing, and like I mentioned above, the public schools are failing. Pouring more money into the public schools is not going to solve any problems, something fundemental is going to have to shift. I also like the idea of Americans having the choice of using vouchers for religious schools (and I don't mean yeshivas).

Last edited by Mommyg8 on Tue, Apr 17 2018, 8:41 pm; edited 1 time in total

Hashem_Yaazor

Tue, Apr 17 2018, 8:39 pm

marina wrote:

The voucher system was meant for families who have no choice but to live in an area with a failing schools. Even though the school district loses some money per pupil with every voucher recipient, this was considered an acceptable way to do right by those families who would be assigned to a failing school.

Wrong. And I've said so in the past.

The voucher program initially started for current Ohio residents.
About 5 years ago, the law changed precisely to attract people to move to Ohio with School Choice being a major part of how the state is run.
The legislation DOES want people to move because of vouchers.

To clarify the voucher system:
The amount is $4,650 for elementary, $6,000 for high school -- no idea where $5400 came in.

The school cannot charge tuition for anyone who qualifies as low income, and must consider the cost of the voucher as full tuition for those students.
Low income is 200% of the FPL. Not so little!
The school can still charge fees.

Voucher is either for being assigned to a failing public school -- you either get the voucher and still pay tuition, or the voucher counts as full tuition as per the rule I just wrote.
Or you get a voucher for being low income and so all you need is the voucher, no matter where you live, BUT (and this is new for this year) the application period for that ends April 30 and will NOT re-open in July so you must be a resident with proof of address in the next 2 weeks, which is highly unlikely. The only option would be to move into an area where you would be assigned a failing public school for next year.

I'm happy to answer any Ohio EdChoice voucher questions.

Kiwi13

Tue, Apr 17 2018, 9:03 pm

Mommyg8 wrote:

I wasn't really commenting on Cleveland's personal politics, as I don't live there Smile

I agree with you. The public schools are broken and the all the money in the world isn't going to help if it isn't going to the right places. A lot has to change, and I agree with you that competition is a good thing. If people want the public schools to be successful then they have to make them an appealing option, not just keep students because they are stuck and have no place else to go. As far as religious schools go, as long as the schools meet US education requirements I think it should be perfectly fine to use them. We are in agreement.
I was just applying the information to the situation in Cleveland, which was the topic being discussed. ;-)

marina

Wed, Apr 18 2018, 2:17 am

Hashem_Yaazor wrote:

People who move for vouchers that they can only get through a failing school system are unlikely to vote to improve that system. This will create - and has created - considerable community discord. This is in addition to the fact that the district loses money on each voucher student. The situation here is getting more tense and unpleasant btw the communities. That is the situation here and I do not know of any source that this outcome is what the legislature intended. Please cite some sources but in the interim, plse invite people coming exclusively for vouchers to move to your town.

Last edited by marina on Wed, Apr 18 2018, 2:23 am; edited 1 time in total

marina

Wed, Apr 18 2018, 2:21 am

Mommyg8 wrote:

I wasn't really commenting on Cleveland's personal politics, as I don't live there Smile

As the article noted, this situation is not about genuine competition. It is about people asking for public tax funds to pay for their children's religious education. That is very different, especially when people are moving just for that.

marina

Wed, Apr 18 2018, 2:26 am

amother wrote:

Ok, but how far is this going to go? Shall we invite all of Brooklyn to move here? What would this look like for the District if hundreds of families start moving in- all of whom would have a financial interest in seeing the District fail? Can you see where this would be an awful scenario?

marina

Wed, Apr 18 2018, 2:33 am

notshanarishona wrote:

The cheap cost of housing is also huge.. In most other cities I have heard of ,you need minimum a few hundred thousand to buy a house while hear you can get around 100K . That is a big thing for people to not need to have to pay a mortgage. Again, you need money to live, but cost of living is cheap.

Cleveland has many excellent features and lower housing prices is one of them. If OP wants to move because Cleveland suits her housing needs or her career aspirations or she wants to live near her grandparents or whatever else, then welcome! let's do coffee and waffles! or Sushi!

But if you're moving just because of vouchers, plse move to Hashem Yaazor's city instead. Thanks.