With charter schools and traditional schools located in the same district, money that could be helpful for both sides are eaten up. In fact, Lily Garcia, President of the National Education Association, when asked about the cons of charter schools, said that “Any good reformer would begin with an analysis of what's happening in our best public schools to see if there's something different from what's happening in our struggling schools. The answer is not a mystery: Resources. Programs. Student supports and services. A good school might have arts programs, a girls' volleyball team, AP courses, a library and a librarian. Wouldn't it be interesting to take an inventory of the programs and services in our best schools and compare that list with what struggling schools have” ? Both charter and traditional schools are funded by taxpayer’s dollars. Some argue that our tax dollars are providing an ample budget, but that the money is not being spent well. Republican Frank Moretz argued that “Education represents 57 percent of the state budget. The amount of money available is not the issue, the issue is how the money is being used. We need to prioritize in-classroom funding, including teacher pay.” Another argued topic about money is vouchers. Vouchers are government given money that is handed out to kids who got into private schools. Private schools are not meant to be free. That is why they are private. The government, however, uses up education funding to provide vouchers to kids. Public education does not have everything right with money either. Charter schools are supposed to be held accountable for their production. The way in which that regulated is not exactly consistent. Most of these schools are urban based. They are more diverse but tend to bring in kids that need more attention from teachers. Performance does not live up to the standard sometimes but, accountability is not held, therefore making it easy for
With charter schools and traditional schools located in the same district, money that could be helpful for both sides are eaten up. In fact, Lily Garcia, President of the National Education Association, when asked about the cons of charter schools, said that “Any good reformer would begin with an analysis of what's happening in our best public schools to see if there's something different from what's happening in our struggling schools. The answer is not a mystery: Resources. Programs. Student supports and services. A good school might have arts programs, a girls' volleyball team, AP courses, a library and a librarian. Wouldn't it be interesting to take an inventory of the programs and services in our best schools and compare that list with what struggling schools have” ? Both charter and traditional schools are funded by taxpayer’s dollars. Some argue that our tax dollars are providing an ample budget, but that the money is not being spent well. Republican Frank Moretz argued that “Education represents 57 percent of the state budget. The amount of money available is not the issue, the issue is how the money is being used. We need to prioritize in-classroom funding, including teacher pay.” Another argued topic about money is vouchers. Vouchers are government given money that is handed out to kids who got into private schools. Private schools are not meant to be free. That is why they are private. The government, however, uses up education funding to provide vouchers to kids. Public education does not have everything right with money either. Charter schools are supposed to be held accountable for their production. The way in which that regulated is not exactly consistent. Most of these schools are urban based. They are more diverse but tend to bring in kids that need more attention from teachers. Performance does not live up to the standard sometimes but, accountability is not held, therefore making it easy for