Public education

Discussion in 'Debate & Marathon Threads Archive' started by IntheFold, Mar 5, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. bonneb

    bonneb Fanatic

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2006
    Messages:
    2,518
    Likes Received:
    9

    Apr 1, 2011

    I think the voucher system would be a step in the right direction. It would not be cash for parents to spend, it would be a voucher to pay the school.

    I also think the running of the school should be done with much more input from the teachers. If teachers ran the schools and budget, we would accomplish a lot in the school system.

    I think one of the best things about our country is the free education offered to all. Even if some of the schools are not run well or have poor teachers, at least all kids have some opportunity. We want an educated country so our people can make good decisions for our country.
     
  2. EdEd

    EdEd Aficionado

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2011
    Messages:
    3,769
    Likes Received:
    233

    Apr 1, 2011

    This is an interesting comment, with 2 (very different) parts. The first part of this suggestion is that teachers should have input into how schools are ran. The second, very differently, suggests that they should run the schools and the budgets.

    I'm wondering if you find that the same skill sets that would be helpful in teaching are the same as in running a school, and vice versa? In other words, do you believe that being a good teacher qualifies one to run a school and budgets?

    Some others have made the exact opposite proposal - that one factor hurting schools is that the unique skill set of being an administrator is not valued, leading to teachers (possibly great teachers) moving up the ladder and leading schools, which may require a very different skill set. As a result, schools suffer because they have effective teachers leading schools, not effective leaders leading schools.

    How would you (or others) respond to these two arguments?
     
  3. LUCHopefulTeach

    LUCHopefulTeach Habitué

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2011
    Messages:
    781
    Likes Received:
    0

    Apr 1, 2011

    +1 Sarge. I found your post to be very insightful.

    Secondly, most private schools (in my area at least) are religious. If we try to segue from public to private schooling then what happens to the students and families who are non-religious or atheist?
     
  4. TeacherShelly

    TeacherShelly Aficionado

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    Messages:
    3,565
    Likes Received:
    0

    Apr 1, 2011

    The thing about efficiency is that it simply does not apply to human relationships. Teaching and learning are relationship heavy. For example, if efficiency in learning how to read was the goal, we teachers would have to get to know each child and customize a series of interactions/lessons with that child to take her from where she is to where we want her to be. This simply is not efficient!

    As a former Six Sigma black belt, I know that taking waste out of a system includes formalizing a process for everything. You should be able to run the same routine with different players and get the same result (five nines! - 99.999% of the time!). You should be able to interchange the testers and the subjects and get the same results. If not, the process is inefficient and costing you MoNeY.

    Efficiency is the enemy of relationships. Relationships are essential to teaching and learning. Children cannot be interchanged and produce the same results.
     
  5. Major

    Major Connoisseur

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2005
    Messages:
    1,620
    Likes Received:
    5

    Apr 1, 2011

    "Six Sigma black belt"....... haven't heard that term is a long time, Shelly....:hugs:.....
     
  6. TeacherShelly

    TeacherShelly Aficionado

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    Messages:
    3,565
    Likes Received:
    0

    Apr 1, 2011

    It's not one to throw around, considering it sounds like some made-up superhero that engineers would think was cool :haha:
     
  7. John Lee

    John Lee Groupie

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2009
    Messages:
    1,480
    Likes Received:
    64

    Apr 1, 2011

    What you are describing is what we essentially have--a (government) monopoly.

    First of all, I think many are confusing the term "private education" to what we normally consider "private" today. Privatizing the system doesn't mean we'll have a bunch of Archbishop _____ schools. You would have as many non-denominated schools that we have today. And your child's "private" education would still be funded publicly in the form of education vouchers from the gov't. (And it's not like you could cash in your voucher at your child's expense, by picking a cheap school and pocketing the difference.)

    As to EdEd's question as to elements that make "private" ed the better choice, again I point to competition and choice. Under our current system, you have no say in your child's education. If for example, you think the public school your kid goes to sucks (and you can't afford other options), you have no recourse. You can't up and put your kid in another school, one you think fits him/her better. 1) Because it's all homogenized to a point where everywhere else around you is similar anyway. But more than that, it's just not allowed. (Since we are making analogies) It's like being told you can only shop for groceries at one store. If they don't carry the items that suit your family's tastes, or you don't like the service, or they have higher prices or whatever, that's too bad.

    I think about a kid at my school--kid is just a mess in terms of organization, being able to sit still, and just going along with the program in most ways... but invariably, at recess, the kid is actively trying to learn, bent over a puddle looking at the worms, or trying to put together a mechanical pencil. And when it's time to rein him in for whatever reason (e.g. recess ends), you can sometimes see the frustration in his face, when you drag him away his learning--from whatever wacky "experiment" he's doing in the playground... because he has to go into class and "learn" by filling in a worksheet or something. A kid like that needs the freedom (i.e. inquiry-based) that public schools as we have them aren't suited to provide. You have all types of these kids, all types of ways they learn, yet we have a one-size-fits-all education system. Shouldn't that parent have the choice to send this kid to a science school or school that suits that child's individual needs in a better way?

    How is making a kid who is terrible at "book work" submit to that type of school work as productive as actually catering to his learning style? IMO it's futile and a waste of that kid's time, the teacher's time, everyone's time. Actually, you have books written by people who believe that sort of thing is a goal of the modern American public school system: hammering kids to conform.

    What you all seem to be saying is that's just casualties of war. I'm saying that's like the whole war.
     
  8. Major

    Major Connoisseur

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2005
    Messages:
    1,620
    Likes Received:
    5

    Apr 1, 2011

    Well I'm not an engineer ...... but I am a geologist/geophysicist extraordinaire....and a couple of decades ago I was very cool .......:p
     
  9. TeacherShelly

    TeacherShelly Aficionado

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    Messages:
    3,565
    Likes Received:
    0

    Apr 1, 2011

    Around here we have Choice Schools (we call them alternative schools because they are alternative to the neighborhood schools, but some think that means they are for bad-behaving kids). If you think your child would learn best in a progressive, project based, whole child focused way, you can apply for my school. If you think the best way is back-to-basics with direct instruction and paper/pencil learning, you can apply for the other choice school. Otherwise, you go to your neighborhood school.

    Public schools can teach the way you describe. Many, many children are doing very well at those schools.
     
  10. EdEd

    EdEd Aficionado

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2011
    Messages:
    3,769
    Likes Received:
    233

    Apr 1, 2011

    John - I think you bring up some interesting ideas related to the privatization concept, but there are many unanswered questions or concerns yet to be addressed, such as the challenges to the concept of competition that Sarge brought up. In addition, the concept of privatization is very unlikely to occur as a complete replacement to public education, so I wonder if it may be more helpful to consider what privatization strategies might be feasible that aren't complete privatization, such as vouchers. Not sure if that would be a new thread or not.

    TeacherShelley - I agree that its hard to make relationships efficient, and that relationships are often at the heart of education, but there is much more to education (and the management of schools) than relationships, and I do think efficiency could be improved in some of these systems.

    I'm trying to think back a few pages ago, but I'm also not sure that schools are bad because of inefficiency? Was that a point made at some point? They may cost more, but I don't think the major problems in public education are because of teacher laziness, inefficiency, or government waste. All of these might occur, but if you look at what contributes to successful schools, or frequent problems that lead to unsuccessful schools, there tend to be many other variables which could be addressed in a public or private system.
     
  11. TiffanyL

    TiffanyL Cohort

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2003
    Messages:
    617
    Likes Received:
    0

    Apr 1, 2011

    This is a great point, bonneb, and very true. Teachers have to take ownership to bring about real change.

    At our school, ideas are generated and implemented from our teachers. I only help to facilitate. This is difficult for many P's as we went into this field due to the belief that we had strong leadership skills.

    The reality is, however, that schools don't need heroes or leaders full of new ideas. They just simply need teachers who are allowed to have the necessary creativity to do what's best for kids.
     
  12. TamiJ

    TamiJ Virtuoso

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2007
    Messages:
    6,873
    Likes Received:
    229

    Apr 1, 2011

    Agreed. It seems a lot of schools do not allow teachers as much input and power in important decisions as I believe they should have. Teachers need to be a bigger part in the decision process.
     
  13. TeacherShelly

    TeacherShelly Aficionado

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    Messages:
    3,565
    Likes Received:
    0

    Apr 1, 2011

    You and John Lee were discussing the relative efficiency of government vs. private sector business. The analogy some have proposed (here and in real life) of running schools like businesses, including competition among "companies" and choice for "customers" is where I get the idea of trying to make teaching and learning efficient. Perhaps no one means that learning can be codified and process driven. Maybe it is all about the back office being streamlined, excess fat being trimmed, and purchasing becoming more competitive. If so, I'm not worried.

    I hear more about value add regarding teacher performance than school district balance sheets, though. I hear that teacher performance could be measured by ranking their student test scores and running some statistics program on the results to remove other affects. I hear that student academic performance is controllable by effective teaching.

    I do have a proposed solution. Change the local funding model of public schools. Take all the property tax money from the state and distribute it evenly among all schools on a per/pupil basis. Pay the teachers the same across the state, too, with a cost of living adjustment for each county. Then no matter where a child is born, they will have an equitable opportunity to get educated.
     
  14. mmswm

    mmswm Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2007
    Messages:
    5,621
    Likes Received:
    6

    Apr 1, 2011

    How would you handle states like Florida with such massive disparities in overhead costs between different counties. Some of the more rural counties have cost of living indexes among the lowest in the country, while counties such as Miami-Dade and Broward have some of the highest cost of living indexes in the country. It's not a small difference. It's massive.
     
  15. EdEd

    EdEd Aficionado

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2011
    Messages:
    3,769
    Likes Received:
    233

    Apr 1, 2011

    Hey TeacherShelly. A few responses:

    I honestly haven't done a thorough analysis of school efficiency, either on the instructional/content side of things, or the business/organizational side of things. I tend to think more about efficacy than efficiency, although both are important. I think talking about generalizations is probably less helpful (e.g., instructional processes are inefficient) and more helpful to talk about specifics (e.g., progress-monitoring could be more streamlined), and these vary from school to school.

    There are a couple of concepts in your comments here. I think you're talking less about the concept of whether efficiency is a relevant construct in instructional/educational processes, which was where my initial comments were targeted. What you are mentioning here seems to be more about whether educational/instructional processes can be effectively measured, either through qualitative or quantitative methods. I think that's a separate conversation, but for what it's worth, here's my take:

    Most things in education can be measured, but not fully. Also, many things can be correlated, but possibly not completely overlapping. For example, in your examples:

    - "teacher performance could be measured by ranking their student test scores and running some statistics program on the results to remove other affects" - I'm not exactly familiar with the statistics, but there are proposed ways of measuring a teacher's contribution to the class based on student test scores. There are certainly some limitations, and I'm not sure I'd use them given their limited development for practical utility, but they exist.

    - "student academic performance is controllable by effective teaching"- Are you disagreeing with this? I definitely hope that teachers believe that academic performance is able to be influenced by their use of effective teaching. Maybe you're highlighting the word "controllable" here? I don't think effective teaching 100% of the time leads to improved academic performance, but the entire teaching profession is based on the concept that effective teaching contributes to academic achievement.

    This already essentially happens in one way or another. Funding typically isn't an exact amount, but based on several formulas designed to equalize funding. These "equal funding" ideas first came about when desegregation efforts had largely failed to equalize education for children from minority backgrounds through legal actions such as cross-district busing. Education/civil rights advocates began filing lawsuites in the early 70s to seek injunctions against states who unequally funded local school districts. A variety of funding models were proposed, which range from simple (e.g., everyone gets the same exact dollar amount) to complex. The main problem with the simple solution of exact funding is that different LEAs have different needs. Most civil rights advocates, for example, were not in favor of exactly equal funding because the thought was that poor, disenfranchised, minority children from urban environments often needed more resources than children from suburban districts, for a variety of reasons. One reason, as an example, is the need for specialized early intervention reading programs for children who enter school unprepared.

    As it stands today, each state has their own specific way of funding, but no state arbitrarily decides to throw more funding at more wealthy school districts, and no state that I'm aware of does not attempt to equalize and redistribute local property tax revenue across districts in some manner.

    This is not to say that all current state education funding models are flawless and completely just, but most do incorporate your suggest of equalized funding on some level or in some form.

    This is an interesting concept, but one of the main issues with this is that LEAs still control education in their districts, and I'm not sure that LEAs would go along with accepting state guidnace/regulation of exact salary amounts. This would effectively prohibit a district from trying to attract top talent to that district with higher pay - while noble from an equality of education perspective, it's probably an idea most LEAs wouldn't go along with.

    Also, I'm not sure how equalized salaries would translate into higher quality education? Most teachers pick the general location of their employment based on where they live, or possibly where they can find a job. I'm not sure that upping a salary in an extremely rural district, for example, would lead a teacher to move to that district for $5,000 more dollars per year. Even if it were, how would that restructuring of personnel across the state help children learn? The talent level of teachers wouldn't increase in that model - talent would just be restructured and shifted around geographically. Some kids might end getting a better teacher, but other kids would lose that good teacher.

    I do, however, think that paying teachers more would increase the incentive for college students to consider the profession. This increase would have to be substantial, though, and counteract all of the other negative components of education. Realistically, it would probably take tens of thousands of dollars per teacher to change the field overall. Not saying even $1,000 wouldn't be appreciated by existing teachers, but if I were 19 and considering business, law, medicine, and teaching, I'm not sure that even a bump from $40,000 to $55,000 would be huge - if I were smart and talented, I'd make way more than that in my first year in business, law, or medicine, and over time would make considerably more than teachers.
     
  16. TeacherShelly

    TeacherShelly Aficionado

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    Messages:
    3,565
    Likes Received:
    0

    Apr 1, 2011

    California is the same way. In my view, that makes my plan even more equitable. If every student came with the same funding, regardless of the neighborhood they were born in, that would be more fair. Now if the state had homogenous property values, it would be a non-issue. When one school district is spending $19,625 per student and another is spending $8,867; that just doesn't seem right. It just seems to entrench poverty and wealth. What if all the kids $14,246.50 each? Then the poorer school would have $64,878,561 to educate 4,554 kids; and the richer school would have $5,684,353.50 to educate 399 kids.

    The way it is now, the parents of the children in the richer school district pay more in taxes and want that money spent on their own children. I get that. However, it would be more equitable if a child who was born to a rich family had the same amount of money spent on her education as one born in a poor family.
     
  17. EdEd

    EdEd Aficionado

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2011
    Messages:
    3,769
    Likes Received:
    233

    Apr 1, 2011

    I think my last post mostly responded to this, but consider that just as "cost of living" affects teachers in different districts, so "cost of educating" affects students. Fair is not equal - fair is giving a child what s/he needs. If a child, because of environmental/family background, needs $8,000, while another child only needs $5,000, it wouldn't be "fair" to give both $5,000.

    Just as teachers differentiate instruction, so education funding must be differentiated. The problem is when funding is differentiated based on parent wealth, not on need.

    As I mentioned, also, most states already consider this. A district may be able to raise more money than another district, but the state does not give more money to one district because their property taxes are higher. Actually, a higher property tax base in many models would result in less subsidies being received, because they have a greater ability to raise the money themselves.
     
  18. mmswm

    mmswm Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2007
    Messages:
    5,621
    Likes Received:
    6

    Apr 1, 2011

    Spending per student includes things like power, water, transportation and teacher salaries. So a district with a lower cost of living should receive less per student. They don't spend as much putting fuel in their buses, paying the electric bill or heating/cooling their buildings. They can also pay their teachers less. 35K would be a great salary in parts of central Florida, but would be poverty level in Miami. If spending per student was homogeneous across the state, the disparity between inner city students in expensive areas and suburban/rural students in lower cost of living areas would increase substantially. That, in my view, is NOT going to "even things out", but further hurt the (mostly) minority students in large inner cities.
     
  19. TeacherShelly

    TeacherShelly Aficionado

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    Messages:
    3,565
    Likes Received:
    0

    Apr 1, 2011

    Ed, I suppose I am being naive thinking a simple redistribution of the wealth would make education equitable. But I still think it is amazingly, shockingly inequitable now. In California (the nation, maybe) there is a baseline amount of money that all schools receive. Above and beyond that, the local property taxes can be spent on education. Where I live, there are two adjoining districts where the teacher pay is very different.

    [​IMG]

    And

    [​IMG]

    I would make $12,000 less if I taught in the poorer district. They border each other. So I think anyone who could, would try to get a job in my district and not in the other one. We all live in a very high cost of living area (of course, a house in the one town is less than the other, but we are all right here in the same geographical area).

    The idea of fair not meaning equal is not lost on me. I agree, and therefore use the word equitable more often than equal. I think the kids in the poorer district above need more money than those in my district. They get $5,000 less per kid, though. My students go on vacations, have after school learning opportunities, and discuss educational topics with their parents and peers. I had a student miss class for two different trips: the Olympics in China and the inauguration of President Obama. The need is clear, and the inequity is equally clear.
     
  20. TeacherShelly

    TeacherShelly Aficionado

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    Messages:
    3,565
    Likes Received:
    0

    Apr 1, 2011

    In my plan there is a COLA adjustment. However, look at the two salary charts in my last post. These districts border each other. It's not Bakersfield and Beverly Hills... the costs are very similar.
     
  21. TeacherShelly

    TeacherShelly Aficionado

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    Messages:
    3,565
    Likes Received:
    0

    Apr 1, 2011

    This is exactly what I find impossibly unfair!
     
  22. mmswm

    mmswm Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2007
    Messages:
    5,621
    Likes Received:
    6

    Apr 1, 2011

    How can you say that "all funding per student should be equal" and "provides for a cost of living adjustment" in the same breath? A cost of living adjustment automatically means that per student funding in the higher cost of living district would be higher.
     
  23. TiffanyL

    TiffanyL Cohort

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2003
    Messages:
    617
    Likes Received:
    0

    Apr 1, 2011

    TeacherShelley, I can clearly see the point you are trying to make and I think you have some excellent views. Not sure what the answer is (sorry!) as it surely is not a simple solution. But....I think you are right on target with regards to the inequality among our schools.
     
  24. TeacherShelly

    TeacherShelly Aficionado

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    Messages:
    3,565
    Likes Received:
    0

    Apr 1, 2011

    Because the plan is to even out the wealth/poverty funding AND making any needed adjustments based on COLA. It won't be exactly even. Santa Barbara and the Peninsula are not equal. But they are MORE CLOSELY related than Fresno and Malibu. So why should the students in one little school district get so amazingly much more money than another when the COLA is similar? Because the parents are wealthy, and that's not equitable or fair.

    I should have added that the spending would be adjusted for COLA as well as the teacher pay. That was my intention.
     
  25. EdEd

    EdEd Aficionado

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2011
    Messages:
    3,769
    Likes Received:
    233

    Apr 1, 2011

    You definitely aren't being naive - it's just a complicated topic. I'm a fairly "numbers-oriented" person, and it took me a while to make my way through those readings on educational funding. It can be complex, in part because it makes it harder to critique (political), but also because of the exact reason you mentioned before about evaluating teachers - it's just complicated and can't be reduced to one simple number, as you mentioned.

    The problem with multiple districts in one geographic area is indeed a big problem, and historically people have actually attempted to consolidate districts to account for disparities, inefficiencies, and other variables such as "white flight." This is incredibly infeasible, and despite Supreme Court rulings forcing consolidation in the past, it hasn't worked out because of the fundamental concept of local control over education.

    The concept of local control also greatly affects the variable you mentioned before - local communities spending more than the base PPE because they have property taxes. Because of local control over education, states can't tell a district that they can't spend more money - they can just give them less, or "Robin Hood" them by taking their money and redistributing. They can't cap expenses, though - at least not that I'm aware of - because they don't have jurisdiction.

    I think you actually hit on one of the fundamental problems with inequitable education - multiple districts in one local. Historically, white families in the 50s & 60s fled the city, in part, to avoid racially integrated schools. By fleeing the city to a separate district, they were able to avoid having to send their children to school with poor Black children. In addition, as you mentioned, an urban district might have significantly fewer additional property taxes than a separate, adjacent suburban district, creating even more disparity. This disparity goes beyond simply the amount of money in the bank, but intangible things like having active parents from wealthy backgrounds (including with high amounts of social capital) present in each school to hold school accountable, provide resources, etc.

    Your solution of trying to minimize the differences between adjacent, unequal districts is actually quite a good one, and subject of current academic thought amongst leaders in sociopolitical educational thought. Some believe that our country may be ready for changes, but the hurdles are great. There are significant barriers, but it doesn't mean it's necessarily impossible.
     
  26. TeacherShelly

    TeacherShelly Aficionado

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    Messages:
    3,565
    Likes Received:
    0

    Apr 1, 2011

    Thank you for that. If it was easy to solve, we wouldn't have the problem. Lots of better minds than mine have worked hard on this, but the problem persists...
     
  27. EdEd

    EdEd Aficionado

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2011
    Messages:
    3,769
    Likes Received:
    233

    Apr 1, 2011

    Again, I think I mentioned this in other posts, but wealthier districts don't get more money from the state. They may generate more revenue, but this isn't because of poor state regulation that favors wealthy districts, at least not overtly. If anything, wealthy districts complain that they lose a lot of their tax basis, and have to sacrifice many things in this economy, because of property tax redistribution.

    See my last post, though - I think you have some good ideas about redistribution with adjacent districts.
     
  28. TeacherGroupie

    TeacherGroupie Moderator

    Joined:
    May 13, 2005
    Messages:
    29,807
    Likes Received:
    1,170

    Apr 1, 2011

    Here's an article on California's rather murky school funding: http://www.ed-data.k12.ca.us/articles/article.asp?title=Guide to California School Finance System.
    Before the Serrano decisions of the early 1970s, schools were funded by property taxes, which are assessed and collected by the county in California. The Serrano suits, of which there were three, were intended to even things out, and as far as the money that schools get from the state, that is indeed equitable. But parents in Beverly Hills pretty much without exception have both more money and more resources with which to find legally defensible workarounds than do parents in, say, Buttonwillow.
     
  29. mmswm

    mmswm Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2007
    Messages:
    5,621
    Likes Received:
    6

    Apr 1, 2011

    TeacherShelly, research funding in Florida schools over the last 5 years or so. Florida did pull the "extra" funds from the "high revenue" counties. The problem, of course, is that Miami-Dade county, home to the old money multi-millionaires in Coral Gables and the new money celebrities on Fischer Island, is also home to some of the poorest inner cities in the nation. The state pulled the "extra" funds, since Miami-Dade has such a huge tax base. The result of that was actually to decrease overall per-student funding to one of the lowest in the state, hurting the urban/immigrant population even further. How is that fair?
     
  30. Marci07

    Marci07 Devotee

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2008
    Messages:
    1,017
    Likes Received:
    0

    Apr 1, 2011

    I agree. We pay a lot more taxes to support our district. Other towns' property taxes are not as high so they probably get less money.
     
  31. TeacherShelly

    TeacherShelly Aficionado

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    Messages:
    3,565
    Likes Received:
    0

    Apr 1, 2011

    It feels so good to be understood.

    You are right that it is complicated. Beyond what you mentioned (already extremely complicated) there are the racial barriers. "Good" elementary school teachers are white ladies (look at the scores!) "Bad" students are students of color. So in comes the white savior of the bad school. There must be a dozen movies about this very scenario.

    The teachers in those "bad" schools, though.. I don't think they are bad teachers. The Calif. Teacher's Association once did an article about a celebrated (white lady) teacher who went into a neighboring "bad" school, performed her magical teaching, and the kids basically performed the same. The factors that made her a good teacher in her wealthier district had everything to do with her connecting (in background, culture, and appearance) to the kids and families she taught.

    The two districts in the salary charts above have a reciprocal arrangement where 10% of the students can bus over to the other district. Once in 30 years, a couple of kids transferred to the poor district. They lasted one year before coming back "home." We have a waiting list for the "poor" kids to come to our schools. However, the students of color who come to us perform similarly to those of color who live in our district: far below the white/asian students.

    You asked before if I disagreed that teachers can influence learning. Of course, I would not have given up 2/3 of my salary and bragging rights of working in tech marketing if I didn't think I could make a difference. I think people believe a "good" teacher would raise API scores regardless of the SE background of the families; and they might just raise the scores, but they would not be able to close the achievement gap. And yes, I was using the word "control" on purpose. I should be able to control student outcomes (or it wouldn't really be fair to judge me by them), according to those who want to measure teacher performance by student performance.
     
  32. TeacherShelly

    TeacherShelly Aficionado

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    Messages:
    3,565
    Likes Received:
    0

    Apr 1, 2011

    So the poor schools in the district lost money along with the wealthy ones. That's not fair, I agree. But what if the schools all received (COLA adjusted) equitable amounts of funds? Then the poor towns in Florida would get enough, and so would the Coral Gables/Fisher Island schools.

    To paraphrase Gandhi, “Taxes provide enough to satisfy every school's need, but not every school's greed.”
     
  33. JustMe

    JustMe Virtuoso

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2006
    Messages:
    7,946
    Likes Received:
    3

    Apr 1, 2011

    Agreed!
     
  34. mmswm

    mmswm Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2007
    Messages:
    5,621
    Likes Received:
    6

    Apr 1, 2011

    The thing is, that Miami-Dade actually does fund all their schools equally. On a smaller geographic scale, MDC can serve as a great observational study. Miami Edison receives the same funding as Palmetto or Killian (all high schools). The parents in the wealthier school areas provide additional funding to their kids' schools through all sorts of avenues. That's funding that the parents of Edison will never be able to match.

    It stinks, but wealthier parents will ALWAYS find a way to provide more funding to their children's schools.
     
  35. TiffanyL

    TiffanyL Cohort

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2003
    Messages:
    617
    Likes Received:
    0

    Apr 1, 2011

    That is because it takes a lot of practice for a leader (and I mean a LOT..I know from experience...lol) to realize that they are not the ones with the solution....the teachers are. Most leaders think that THEY are the key to change, THEY are the one with the great ideas...if only everyone would just listen and do as they are told. :blush:

    Even if I had a great plan, the best plan ever, if my teachers don't buy-in, it will never be successful.

    I've realized at my site that my teachers have great ideas....I need to build that in them, support that in them...that's when they perform at their optimum level, that's when their attitudes change, they become more positive. That's when scores increase, excuses diminish and kids become affected in truly amazing ways.
     
  36. JustMe

    JustMe Virtuoso

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2006
    Messages:
    7,946
    Likes Received:
    3

    Apr 1, 2011

    I just finished reading through this discussion with particular interest in the conversation about changing the way money is divided in the state. I can hardly begin to wrap my brain around how massive of a situation/problem this is. The cycle we have going in the United States is simply sad, and as Shelly said, shocking. What you said, mmswm, is something I think is true—that wealthier parents will always find a way to provide more funding, more opportunities for their children. Those born poor have such an uphill battle ahead of them... :(
     
  37. mmswm

    mmswm Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2007
    Messages:
    5,621
    Likes Received:
    6

    Apr 1, 2011

    Here's one outcome of "equitable redistribution"

    Cut and pasted from http://www.ongo.com/v/596392/-1/308BA0D35A465C6E/miami-dade-schools-need-fair-funding-from-state

    Again, how "fair" is that? By the way, Miami-Dade has been gaining national attention for thriving these last few years in tough economic circumstances. The new super has managed to budget through huge cuts without laying off teachers or sacrificing special education, magnet schools and extra-curriculars. He's done most of it by doing what many of us always suggest, which is to cut central administration by 52%. Still, the governor wants to cut even more, decreasing even further the amount of tax dollars returned to the county by the state. They already lose a substantial amount of the per student of tax money that they paid in, all because they're a "rich" county.
     
  38. TeacherShelly

    TeacherShelly Aficionado

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    Messages:
    3,565
    Likes Received:
    0

    Apr 1, 2011

    The superintendent of the Miami Dade district who wrote the article said there is one solution to mitigate $87 million of the loss in funding by making people who dispute their tax bill pay some of the money upfront.

    I don't know if the Miami Dade situation fully disproves the idea of spreading the money more evenly among schools. The situation there is the money is spread among counties. Perhaps it would be more fair to spread the money more evenly among schools?
     
  39. mmswm

    mmswm Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2007
    Messages:
    5,621
    Likes Received:
    6

    Apr 1, 2011

    What he's saying about paying some of the taxes up front is a very viable solution if you understand how property taxes work in Florida. Property owners can dispute their tax bills if values have declined substantially since the last tax assessment. If a property owner disputes the tax bill, then they don't have to pay until it is resolved. Now, considering just how far property values have plunged in Florida, and especially in the larger cities, you can imagine just how many property owners are disputing their bills. Add to that the funding cuts for city offices, and the backlog of disputes is rather large. The whole time the bill is in dispute, the property owner isn't paying any taxes and the county is not receiving the funds for things like schools, police and fire services. The super's suggestion of the disputing property owner to pay a portion of the bill would get more money into the county budgets sooner. I think that's more than reasonable.
     
  40. mmswm

    mmswm Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2007
    Messages:
    5,621
    Likes Received:
    6

    Apr 1, 2011

    Oh, and in Florida, the counties are the districts. All of Miami-Dade is one district, all of Broward another, Brevard another, and so on and so forth. As far as school funding is concerned, the words county and district can be used interchangeably.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

Members Online Now

  1. Ima Teacher,
  2. MrsC
Total: 482 (members: 2, guests: 451, robots: 29)
test