I think what Sen. Uruqahart has done is good, but here's an even better
fix.How about funding the student, rather than the institution?By that I mean, why not assign a certain amount of a "credit" to
each student as they graduate high school to use for whatever educational
pursuits they desire.For example, give each and every Utah high
school graduate $5,000.00 to spend on University, community college, or even
trade school. No, they don't get cash, they get education
"credits" to be paid to whatever institution they attend. REPLACE that
money with all the money we shovel to higher ed., that seem intent ONLY on
maintaining tenured professors 6 figure salaries.It would FINALLY
put higher ed. on notice that they must actually prepare kids for a
profession,rather than their current focus of simply maintaining the status
quo.Kids would figure out pretty quick how best to spend their
Fitness Freak,Your idea sounded great to me.Oh wait...
isn't that a lot like education "VOUCHERS"... and we all know we
HATE Education Vouchers. At least if they can use them at PRIVATE schools...
"2 bits" I, for one would be glad to have those education
"credits" go to private schools like Everest College, College of
Massage, etc., but I don't think that would pass "muster" (public
money going to private schools!).However, over the last few years
the problem I see is that so many public higher education institutions have gone
to liberal arts degrees while basically shoving "trades" to the back
shelf.i.e. Where can I go to a "public" institution for
learn truck driving, meat cutting, barbering, etc.How come funding
for higher education ONLY goes to people who want "degrees to nowhere"
(art history?).True, SLCC does still offer SOME trades, but I
suspect those (few that are still offered)don't get anything close to the
amount of funding we throw at U. of U.
Fitness Freak,How do you feel about Education Vouchers for parents of
younger kids? (pre-college)So they can pick the school their kids
attend... and direct the money for educating their kids to that school...?
2 Bits,Normally republicans would call taking my tax money and
giving it to an individual to buy services for their child redistribution of
wealth and would be opposed to that, why not in this situation? Oh
and by the way, parents can pick the school their child attends now. We have
open enrollment for public schools and no laws that prohibit sending your
children to public schools. Maybe a better plan would be to take
the state and federal government out of the education business and let parents
keep more of their tax money and buy their child's education on the open
Fred44,As a Libertarian... I like that Idea. Never thought a virtual
monopoly on education was what the founding fathers intended, or
government's job. Education should be separate IMO.But my
practical side tells me this would lead to the gradual death of public
schools... and so many people depend on them now. We are used to the
government doing this for us.I fear if we had a Voucher system... we
would have a tiered system of education (top rate education for some... and
bottom of the barrel education for others stuck in public schools). I
don't want that (out of fairness and the future of our nation). So I
oppose vouchers on that principle (and let it override my usual political
leanings on stuff like this).
Now if we could only get rid of the amendment added by our legislature a few
years back that basically stole the funding for k-12 and sent it to higher ed in
the first place. There is a reason we are dead last in k-12 per pupil spending.
The funds to pay for these kids was sent to higher ed when it rightfully
belonged to the young ones.Sad.