Microcosm of the voucher arguments

There were two interesting letters to the editor in the Standard Examiner on Thursday.

The first one, in opposition to vouchers, cited a recent article by Paul Mero and systematically refuted claims made by Mero, citing specific studies done by researchers comparing performance of students in private and public schools, specifically in regards to African Americans. This writer included the following in his letter: "Despite diligent effort, researchers have found little evidence that school vouchers increase student learning. It is time that those who would improve education through vouchers reassess their position and consider new possibilities...The goal is real learning, not hypothetical learning."

The second, in support of vouchers, contained the following statements:

"Why have we entrusted the education of our children to the faceless names of the Utah Education Association?"

"Why, then, should we, who claim to want the best education for our children, reject state referendum 1?"

"(Vouchers) would give parents, who would not otherwise be able to obtain a good education for their children, the opportunity to provide them with the education they deserve."

"Those who oppose this bill also oppose the right all of us hold dear: the right to provide our children with a better education than what the public schools could ever hope to provide."

Hmm. Logical, reasoned argument, supported by research and data, versus emotional, ideological claims unsupported by evidence, accompanied by name calling, including the obligatory castigation of the evil teacher's union.

Pretty good microcosm of the whole debate, isn't it?