...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>USA today >THE FUTURE OF SCHOOL CHOICE
【24h】

THE FUTURE OF SCHOOL CHOICE

机译：学校选择的未来

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

In Upuholding the constitutionality of the Cleveland voucher program in Zel-man v. Simmons-Harris in June, 2002, the Supreme Court affirmed that it hardly constitutes a government establishment of religion if religious schools are among the choices parents can freely make. By implication, government schools don't have an automatic claim on a child's education superior to the choice of his or her parents. The constitutionality of a particular, and very successful, voucher program clears away a major roadblock to expanding freedom of choice in education. It is rekindling the debate about breaking up the government monopoly in schooling and giving parents and children new options. Vouchers are one way to do that, but so are tax credits, whose constitutionality also has been affirmed by court rulings. In the months and years to come, some states may adopt vouchers; others may opt for tax credits; and some may embrace both. Choice opponents such as the teacher unions―that we call the "send the cash, keep the change" crowd-are clearly on the defensive now, and that is big news for the country.
机译：在2002年6月的Zelman诉Simmons-Harris一案中，坚持克利夫兰代金券计划的合宪性，最高法院申明，如果宗教学校是父母可以自由选择的选择，则这几乎不构成政府的宗教组织。言外之意，公立学校没有自动要求孩子接受其父母选择的教育。特定且非常成功的代金券计划的合宪性为扩大教育选择自由扫清了主要障碍。它正在重新引发关于取消政府在学校教育方面的垄断并为父母和子女提供新选择的辩论。凭单是这样做的一种方式，税收抵免也是如此，法院的裁决也确认了税收抵免的合宪性。在未来的几个月和几年中，一些州可能会采用代金券；其他人可以选择税收抵免；有些人可能会两者都拥抱。诸如教师工会这样的选择反对者，我们称之为“寄钱，保留零钱”的人群，现在显然已经处于防御状态，这对美国来说是个大新闻。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号