School supply shopping

Discussion in 'Teacher Time Out' started by Aces, Jul 29, 2018.

  1. futuremathsprof

    futuremathsprof Aficionado

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2014
    Messages:
    3,765
    Likes Received:
    1,014

    Aug 1, 2018

    Be careful, you are far too logical and sensible! The current generation and my generation thinks everything should be free and they shouldn’t have to work so they can get their EBT (extreme bum transaction) card.
     
  2. Been There

    Been There Habitué

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2017
    Messages:
    849
    Likes Received:
    514

    Aug 1, 2018

    Why is quantity important? The fact that I once bought an unused pair of $250 shoes for just $2 at a thrift shop and don't wear a $1,000 Rolex are a reflection of my spending priorities. You can bet when they outgrow their expensive shoes and clothing, they just go out to buy more - at least, that's what I noticed.
     
    futuremathsprof likes this.
  3. a2z

    a2z Maven

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2010
    Messages:
    5,628
    Likes Received:
    1,513

    Aug 1, 2018

    I guess quantity isn't any more important than them having these items at all since you can buy a $250 pair of shoes at a thrift store for $2.

    I guess I am now wondering about the validity of your complaint about poor people having nice things when you point out they don't have to cost a lot. So, why is it bad for them to have them?

    My point about quantity is that it takes a lot of the "luxury" items to pay for some of the things that you complain that they get for free and these expenses are every month if they were not free. If you were to say if they had none of these items they could afford all of the services you are complaining about them having for free, I could see the point. But they could do without all of these things and still not be able to get out of poverty, partly because the system is designed to not allow them to get out of poverty.

    You pointed out $260 dollars worth of stuff. Same kid? Well $260 dollars won't pay for health insurance for the family. So, unless these kids are getting multiples of these items or new ones every month, these items won't put a dent in the position their family is in. So, that is why I pointed out quantity. Then you also have to factor in the fact that some of the items would require some cost, such as shoes and pants because you can't always find those things that fit at the thrift shop. So the net result is probably under $200 for the items.

    And honestly, year ago, kids had to bring very little to school, if anything. It was supplied by the school. Now our local elementary, middle and high school's lists for the students rack up bills close to $100/kid. Yes, the schools put the brand they want on the list. Between the Clorox wipes, Ziplock bags in multiple sizes, Trapper Keeper binders one year and a different type the next year, 3 inch binders, pencils, markers, crayons, glue sticks, elmer's glue, specific types of notebooks with a certain number of pages, loose leaf paper, composition notebooks, page protectors, tab dividers, pencil pouch, water colors, paint brush, pink pearl eraser, white eraser, and on and on.

    I guess I have to ask why any school should require that of parents when all we needed at most growing up was a pack of crayons (8) and a pencil with eraser.
     
    phillyteacher likes this.
  4. Been There

    Been There Habitué

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2017
    Messages:
    849
    Likes Received:
    514

    Aug 1, 2018

    You seem to miss the point. Everyone is entitled to have "nice things" regardless of their SES. However, a healthy financial attitude is to "live within one's means" - not a popular practice these days. I mentioned my thrift shop experience only to share a viable option for those who wish to watch their spending and enjoy having nice things. I didn't realize just how expensive those $2 shoes were until I got home and looked them up on the internet! BTW, I don't believe I ever expressed an actual "complaint about poor people having nice things". I simply commented about what I had observed, similar to what Ms. Holyoke and TeacherNY had said. I noticed that you didn't bother to respond to their comments.
     
    Last edited: Aug 1, 2018
  5. a2z

    a2z Maven

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2010
    Messages:
    5,628
    Likes Received:
    1,513

    Aug 1, 2018

    So, why do you ask them? Curiosity is not a real reason. Curiosity always has a motive behind it. Also, why point out they have nice things when getting free services when those free things would never pay for the free services they received nor can you be sure how they obtained those items? Doing so comes with implied judgement.
     
  6. futuremathsprof

    futuremathsprof Aficionado

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2014
    Messages:
    3,765
    Likes Received:
    1,014

    Aug 1, 2018

    I think what Been There is trying to say is that it does not logically make sense for parents to spend hundreds and hundreds of dollars on expensive goods like luxury clothing and fancy iPhones, but they can’t go to the Dollar Store, for instance, to buy pencils and paper along with other school supplies for their kid(s). That’s what my parents did. How is it difficult to spend a couple of dollars for school supplies?
     
    Last edited: Aug 1, 2018
  7. a2z

    a2z Maven

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2010
    Messages:
    5,628
    Likes Received:
    1,513

    Aug 1, 2018

    As I said, our local supply lists are upwards of $100/ kid. Also, many parents came from a time where schools supplied all necessary items. To them, schools asking for supplies is out of the norm. Why should parents have to buy supplies when the school is supposed to provide a free education?

    I guess I have to ask what many other teachers are asking, why is it that schools aren't supplying the basic necessities for students to receive an education? The district gets that new turf field but can't supply paper and pencils.
     
    phillyteacher likes this.
  8. Been There

    Been There Habitué

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2017
    Messages:
    849
    Likes Received:
    514

    Aug 1, 2018

    You're right. Adults are rarely curious for the sake of curiosity. I must admit, I was being a bit nosey. I envy those rare individuals who can interact with their students without passing judgement, regardless of whether their clothes are in tatters or are the newest designer-label brands.
     
  9. futuremathsprof

    futuremathsprof Aficionado

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2014
    Messages:
    3,765
    Likes Received:
    1,014

    Aug 1, 2018

    Because it shouldn’t be the school’s responsibility, nor should it be the taxpayer’s responsibility to buy students school supplies. That’s their parent’s job. My parents never spent more than $40/year on school supplies for me from the Dollar Store and I had excess at the end. Paper comes in huge packs, as do pencils, pens, scissors, glue sticks, etc.

    Times have changed. More supplies are needed now. As technology change and curricular change, so do the supplies needed for each.
     
  10. a2z

    a2z Maven

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2010
    Messages:
    5,628
    Likes Received:
    1,513

    Aug 1, 2018

    We will have to disagree. Taxpayers pay for what is necessary to educate students. If that means they need paper and pencils to learn and demonstrate learning, that is part of their education. If a teacher decides they need specific supplies to do an assignment, then it is on the school to provide those items since the school is dictating that supplies are needed for the chosen task.

    Supplies are at the whim of the teacher and what he or she chooses to assign. There are many ways to educate with minimal supplies. Just because a teacher decides she needs a 40 count of gallon sized ziplock bags in order to educate the students doesn't mean that it is really necessary. Nor should a family have to provide those items.
     
    mathmagic and Ms.Holyoke like this.
  11. a2z

    a2z Maven

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2010
    Messages:
    5,628
    Likes Received:
    1,513

    Aug 1, 2018

    Why shouldn't it be the schools responsibility to provide the items they deem necessary for a student to receive an education since that education is mandated by the state and is supposed to be free? Schools and teachers are deciding on what lessons to teach, not the parents or the students.
     
    phillyteacher likes this.
  12. futuremathsprof

    futuremathsprof Aficionado

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2014
    Messages:
    3,765
    Likes Received:
    1,014

    Aug 1, 2018

    So let’s see: Poor families now get free educations, free school supplies, free food, subsidized housing, free healthcare, and don’t have to pay federal taxes. Should the state adopt their children, too, because they are paying for just about everything?
     
  13. a2z

    a2z Maven

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2010
    Messages:
    5,628
    Likes Received:
    1,513

    Aug 1, 2018

    Let's see. Everyone is required to obtain an education and the state provides a free education whether the student is rich or poor.

    Should the state take away free education for the rich and require them to pay?
     
  14. Ima Teacher

    Ima Teacher Maven

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2005
    Messages:
    5,376
    Likes Received:
    894

    Aug 1, 2018

    Not so much anymore. Every year schools and teachers losing more autonomy. So much is prescribed now.
     
    bella84 likes this.
  15. TeacherGroupie

    TeacherGroupie Moderator

    Joined:
    May 13, 2005
    Messages:
    29,552
    Likes Received:
    1,060

    Aug 1, 2018

    In fact the California state constitution explicitly states that "the Legislature shall provide" a system of common schools that are free, and has done so since very shortly after it was written in the 19th century. (The phrase "common schools", since the mid-20th century, is generally agreed to refer to schools serving grade 12 and below.)

    A number of cases judged by or settled in the state supreme court have dealt with the implications and scope of this provision of the state constitution; among these cases - which are or should be discussed in credential programs - are Serrano v. Priest (1971), Hartzell v. Connell (1984), Doe v. California (2010), and Williams v. California (2004). The "Williams settlement" draws on the earlier cases in considering the question of whether "free education" includes the whole range of experiences that a well-rounded education should offer: if we agree that a California school should offer art or band or athletic teams or cheerleading or labs that involve expensive equipment or AP Calculus or field trips - and most of us do - then California's constitution as written commits us to the proposition that every student should be able to participate fully irrespective of whether her parents can afford the activity fees or the TI-84 calculator, and without having to seek fee waivers.

    One consequence of these cases, especially Hartzell and Williams, is not that California public schools may not levy participation fees on families in poverty but rather that, except in certain cases, California schools may not levy fees on any student, period. Both the Williams settlement and the need to avoid Williams violations are covered in state-approved credential programs along with IDEA, Title I, Title IX, ESSA, and other legislation and jurisprudence on education.

    It's worth pointing out that California is not unique in having a constitution that mandates free grade-school education, and indeed court cases on the question have begun cropping up in other states. It's prudent to expect the trend to continue and spread.
     

Share This Page

Members Online Now

  1. Charlie Trahan,
  2. mathmagic,
  3. vickilyn
Total: 679 (members: 3, guests: 644, robots: 32)
test