Second can you present a clear viable alternative that will work for so many children?
Government schools are HIGHLY HIGHLY HIGHLY restricted regarding who can or can not use their services.
As for the terminology ( government school or “public”), the fascist government school defenders have lost that battle. Conservatives have conquered that language battlefield hill.
Enact vouchers, tax credits, and charters to help build a private infrastructure.
Change state constitutions so government schools would charge middle class parents the full cost of government education ( not just the operating expenses). That cost is likely 2 to 3 times what the government schools say it is.
Allow any group of teachers to turn their government school into a charter school. An example of this would be the Green Dot charters in Los Angeles. ( Look it up on Google.)
I would allow teachers to run one room schools in their homes. The zoning and health requirements should be no more burdensome that those used for existing day care.
I would encourage the development of qualifying exams for all subjects starting in the first grade. Internet education and certifiable testing could be completely free to the user if the producers accepted advertising. Also the producers have the opportunity to be a rich as Mark Zuckerman. ( Do a Google on the words, “Charles Murray and qualifying exams”, for more info on that.)
Over the next 20 years, parents vouchers and tax credits would be reduced until parents took on the full responsibility of educating their children in the same way that they are responsible for feeding, clothing, and housing them, now. Vouchers and tax credits would be reserved for the very poorest. In an ideal world the poor would be educated with charity.
No, twit. It's government education, gubmint for short (and to indicate contempt).
Public
has a positive connotation. Government
, these days, evokes a negative response. Just ask Frank Luntz.