Sentences with phrase «money from the school choice»

Brandon was a recipient of a significant amount of campaign money from the school choice movement during his 2012 run for office — 25 percent of his campaign contributions came from pro-voucher investors.

Not exact matches

From Walk - a-thons and fun runs to hula hoop competitions and cookbooks, there are many ways to earn money for your school while encouraging kids and families to make healthy choices.

They even send you a bag with your purchased item to donate gently or new clothing and 40 % of the sales from these items they sale for you will help a school of your choice raise money.

Essentially, I'm a concerned that the bulk of play is going to adhere to some of the old - school choices that were on display right from the start — things like breaking open containers to earn money, flipping switches to open doors and dealing with a surprising amount of platform jumping.

Also, instructional per - pupil spending has increased in all affected public school districts, contradicting the belief that school choice programs take money away from public school students, the report says.

Then students and teachers can text in a charity that they want to get involved with and donate the money from that period of time to the charity of the school's choice.

But as we've learned from roughly a quarter - century of experience with state - level school choice programs and federal higher education policy, any connection to the federal government can have unintended consequences for choice, including incentivizing government control of the schools to which public money flows.

Blaine Amendments, passed in the late 1800s amid a nationwide surge of anti-Catholic animus, prevent public money from flowing to religious schools and have proven a powerful impediment to the expansion of private school choice (see «Heading for a Fall,» legal beat, Winter 2016).

JS: For the past thirty years, the phrase «vouchers drain money from public schools» has been repeated so often in the press and by opponents of school choice that many people reflexively believe it.

Uncle Sam could then cease and desist from telling states and districts how to run their schools, how to «qualify» and evaluate their teachers, how and on what to spend their money, what to do about low - performing schools, to whom and how to provide choices among which sorts of schools and how many of them, etc..

This is not just about saving money it is about giving schools the chance to make the right educational choices and helping them ensure that they are getting the maximum life from the equipment and resources that they buy.

Aside from the fact that this is a false choice (competition can actually improve public school performance and school choice programs can save money), the wording is blatantly designed to push respondants toward Approach A.

The plaintiffs» amended complaint contends the school choice programs, among other programs, unconstitutionally «divert» money from Florida's public schools.

This puts the lie to the oft - repeated claim of critics like National Education Association president Bob Chase that school choice is «siphoning money from the communities and public schools that need it the most.»

Aside from the fact that this is a false choice (competition can actually improve public school performance and school choice programs can save money), the wording is blatantly designed to push respondents toward Approach A.

However, as the need grew for legal defense of emerging school choice programs, Bolick turned his attention to it and co-founded the libertarian, public interest law firm Institute for Justice in 1991 with seed money from David and Charles Koch.

What Opponents of School Choice Say: School choice «siphons» money from public schools at the expense of kids and taxpChoice Say: School choice «siphons» money from public schools at the expense of kids and taxpchoice «siphons» money from public schools at the expense of kids and taxpayers.

From centrist Democrats who think that choice should only be limited to the expansion of public charter schools (and their senseless opposition to school vouchers, which, provide money to parochial and private schools, which, like charters, are privately - operated), to the libertarian Cato Institute's pursuit of ideological purity through its bashing of charters and vouchers in favor of the voucher - like tax credit plans (which explains the irrelevance of the think tank's education team on education matters outside of higher ed), reformers sometimes seem more - focused on their own preferred version of choice instead of on the more - important goal of expanding opportunities for families to provide our children with high - quality teaching and comprehensive college - preparatory curricula.

Results from the School Improvement Grants have shored up previous research showing that pouring money into dysfunctional schools and systems does not work, Smarick said: «I can imagine Betsy DeVos and Donald Trump saying this is exactly why kids need school choice.&School Improvement Grants have shored up previous research showing that pouring money into dysfunctional schools and systems does not work, Smarick said: «I can imagine Betsy DeVos and Donald Trump saying this is exactly why kids need school choice.&school choice.»

Although he was vague about where the money for the program would come from or how exactly it would work, his selection of DeVos suggests that school choice will be a prominent feature of the Trump administration.

Will Flanders» March 26 column «Expand school choice» last Sunday expressed his opinion that public money should be funneled to unaccountable private schools and away from accountable public schools.

Would they be happier if she had spent her money denying children from low - income families choices of schools?

The plan promoted by Trump and Education Secretary Betsy DeVos widened a divide in the school - choice movement and brought swift condemnation from people who support more competition for public schools in the form of charter schools but oppose sending tax money to private institutions.

President Donald Trump's budget proposal to provide federal tax money for private - school scholarships is getting pushback from an unconventional source: groups known for promoting school - choice initiatives.

«When this government sets up free schools in places where there are already surplus places supposedly to create more choice, it does so by taking money away from other kids in real need of a school place,» he will say.

They say, simplistically, that school choice drains money from the public school system.

He added: «There is no new money for teachers or classrooms so primary heads, faced with impending reductions in psychological services and learning support, could have to turn parents away from the school of their choice at P1.

Critics of the voucher program insist it will tear money away from public schools, while supporters have hailed it as a way to give low - income families school choice.

As the Trump administration seeks to expand school choice nationwide, the academy was thrust into the national spotlight last month as part of a heated debate over whether schools that receive money from taxpayer - funded vouchers can discriminate against certain groups of students, such as LGBT children or students with disabilities.

«Siphoning monies away from public schools in favor of selective charter organizations is a reckless choice.»

«Gov. Dannel P. Malloy moved quickly Thursday to exploit what Democrats say is an ill - considered and impractical proposal by Republican Tom Foley to allow urban parents to pick the local public school of their choice and strip money from failing schools as their children go elsewhere.

George Miller, the former congressman from California, slammed her plan to create a $ 20 billion «school choice» program that would underwrite private and religious schools, calling it «a perfect storm of ignorance, money, and power.»

Cantor said Wednesday that he wants more «school choice» — allowing parents to pull students from weak public schools and enroll them in a better traditional, charter or private school, with tuition ideally paid with federal money.

Opponents of school choice frequently claim that vouchers and scholarship tax credits «siphon» money from public schools and increase the overall cost of education to the taxpayers.

As White points out: «School choice» means something different to everyone but usually encompasses the idea that a benevolent federal agency «allows» low - income parents to move from one education facility to another (charter schools), with public money (vouchers), «in order to provide their children with what the bureaucrats or philanthropists think will be a better education for them.»

«[W] ith the explosion of public charters, magnets and creative choice schools, the need to siphon money away from public schools as a way to embolden innovation and diversity of opportunity is no more.»

Luke Messer, a Republican Congressman from Indiana who is a friend of Mike Pence and who founded the Congressional School Choice Caucus already suggested that some or all of the money for Trump's school choice program could come from the $ 15 billion the federal government spends on Title I. Grabbing money intended to help public schools that serve the nation's most needy children and turning it into an uncontrolled experiment in vouchers and unregulated charter schools is exactly the kind of project Betsy DeVos would rSchool Choice Caucus already suggested that some or all of the money for Trump's school choice program could come from the $ 15 billion the federal government spends on Title I. Grabbing money intended to help public schools that serve the nation's most needy children and turning it into an uncontrolled experiment in vouchers and unregulated charter schools is exactly the kind of project Betsy DeVos would rChoice Caucus already suggested that some or all of the money for Trump's school choice program could come from the $ 15 billion the federal government spends on Title I. Grabbing money intended to help public schools that serve the nation's most needy children and turning it into an uncontrolled experiment in vouchers and unregulated charter schools is exactly the kind of project Betsy DeVos would rschool choice program could come from the $ 15 billion the federal government spends on Title I. Grabbing money intended to help public schools that serve the nation's most needy children and turning it into an uncontrolled experiment in vouchers and unregulated charter schools is exactly the kind of project Betsy DeVos would rchoice program could come from the $ 15 billion the federal government spends on Title I. Grabbing money intended to help public schools that serve the nation's most needy children and turning it into an uncontrolled experiment in vouchers and unregulated charter schools is exactly the kind of project Betsy DeVos would relish.

Now, instead of just mandatory annual testing and punitive measures for struggling schools, cash - strapped states — who had little choice but to pursue the multi-billion-dollar grant money — were made to implement specific federally supported education reforms.19 In the end, despite the Obama administration's efforts to distance itself from NCLB, and the failure of NCLB's testing mandates (in particular the mandated but statistically impossible 100 percent proficiency rates), the act's design provided the policy blueprint that led to RTTT.

This move should signal that he is not interested in providing adequate resources to public schools, but rather intends to shift money away from public schools to other «choice» schools, such as charters.

So, Mr. Cunningham, thanks again for all that you and Education Post do to «honor teachers for the work they do every day as professionals», and shining the bright reformer spotlight on the serious problems in public education today — by attacking unions, working to eliminate teacher tenure and job protections, and supporting the proliferation of for - profit charter schools (under the guise of «school choice») that under - perform and siphon money away from public schools.