NYT: Repugs property tax cuts strangling TX schools

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/15/ed...gewanted=print

Not only are the proposed cuts to school aid draconian, but the state Legislature in 2006 put strict limits how much districts can raise local property taxes. That means local school boards find themselves trapped between rising enrollment, double-digit drops in state aid and frozen local taxes.


http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/15/ed...gewanted=print

==========

red-state bubbas, always Messing With Texas and making it better.

and we're starting from such a high level, we have plenty to cut out:

State Sen. Wendy Davis says Texas ranks 44th in education spending per student

http://politifact.com/texas/statemen...s-44th-educat/

And obviously the only way to generate money for school funding is via property taxes.......there couldn't possibly be another solution......could there?

Good...the school districts needed a wakeup call. Average district in Texas spends 80% of their money on shit not directly related to education.

its texas. eliminate all science classes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CosmicCowboy

Good...the school districts needed a wakeup call. Average district in Texas spends 80% of their money on shit not directly related to education.

---

You Lie......we need to raise property taxes.

I can't type that with a straight face.

Here in the UAC, we need Neocunts, repugs, unfuckable, bubbas.

You lie.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CosmicCowboy

Good...the school districts needed a wakeup call. Average district in Texas spends 80% of their money on shit not directly related to education.

---

yeah Let's starve the schools! And then blame the Teacher's Union when it goes to hell!

"Texas spends 80% of their money on shit not directly related to education."

please post link school districts' public budgets.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by boutons_deux

"Texas spends 80% of their money on shit not directly related to education."

please post link school districts' public budgets.

---

Looks like the figure is in the 60% range.

http://www.tasbo.org/files-public/pu...ondollar09.pdf
"In terms of the purpose of educational expenditures, the largest share of dollars allocated goes to instruction (61 percent), and this is also unchanged since 2003-04. Included in the area of instruction are the salaries and benefits costs of 299,000 teachers and 56,000 instructional aides who work in Texas classrooms. Also included here are the cost associated with 4,800 librarians and the cost of library materials as well as staff development costs."

Now, you can bitch till your face turns blue, but what's your solution? I've yet to actually see you posit a cogent stance on education.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by boutons_deux

"Texas spends 80% of their money on shit not directly related to education."

please post link school districts' public budgets.

---

please go fuck yourself.

The 2008-2009 numbers (last year available) Texas spent $11,084 per kid. The math should be pretty easy even for an idiot like you.

Money spent per student is the most base of metrics. It's a figure that means, really, very little.

I can multiply by .8.

I'm not disagreeing that public schools don't spend efficiently, but since you make the 80% quantitative claim, you provide the evidence.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TeyshaBlue

Money spent per student is the most base of metrics. It's a figure that means, really, very little.

---

Oh really? It seems pretty simple.

In the same year the average teachers pay was $47,000 a year.

Figure the average teacher had 22 kids in the class.

That's $243,914.00

Boutons, So by that theory, I want proof of a VRWC........you know, the one you mention in EVERY SINGLE ONE OF YOUR POSTS.

You missed my point. A simple $/student metric has no value whatsoever in quantifying the quality or lack thereof, of education delivered.

Btw...I think your 22 kids/class avg. is a bit optimistic. Current regulations set class sizes at 25:1 max for elementary and middle school.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TeyshaBlue

You missed my point. A simple $/student metric has no value whatsoever in quantifying the quality or lack thereof, of education delivered.

Btw...I think your 22 kids/class avg. is a bit optimistic. Current regulations set class sizes at 25:1 max for elementary and middle school.

---

I agree. there is NO relationship between dollars spent and educational delivered.

*Waiting on boutonski's proposed solution*

:wakeup

There is a strong relationship between quality of the teachers and student success. If teachers were paid $100K year and entry barriers to obtaining such a salary were high enough to assure quality applicants, we'd see some improvements.

Too many teachers seem to the ones who took Home Economics in HS and went to teacher college because the entry barriers were low.

I saw another idea that said all of a school's admin staff MUST have come up through the teacher ranks, and not be "business" or non-teacher professional administrator types, like Bloomberg's new non-teacher "business" hire to be chancellor of NYC schools.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CosmicCowboy

I agree. there is NO relationship between dollars spent and educational delivered.

---

Sincerely,

A guy who has no idea what happens in schools on a daily basis

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by George Gervin's Afro

Sincerely,

A guy who has no idea what happens in schools on a daily basis

---

Sincerely

A guy who the education system clearly failed

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CosmicCowboy

Sincerely

A guy who the education system clearly failed

---

I went to private school for 12 yrs. Don't you think compensating the most qualified teachers is important?

Then there is a correllation between money and education..


That was REALLY easy to debunk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by George Gervin's Afro

I went to private school for 12 yrs. Don't you think compensating the most qualified teachers is important?

Then there is a correllation between money and education..


That was REALLY easy to debunk

---

The current education system in Texas does not allow the best teachers to get extra compensation. There is no relationship between pay and results.

Debunk.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CosmicCowboy

The current education system in Texas does not allow the best teachers to get extra compensation. There is no relationship between pay and results.

Debunk.

---

So the good teachers who go to higher paying school districts don't make any difference... mmm ok.

rebunked

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by George Gervin's Afro

I went to private school for 12 yrs. Don't you think compensating the most qualified teachers is important?

Then there is a correllation between money and education..


That was REALLY easy to debunk

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CC

I agree. there is NO relationship between dollars spent and educational delivered.

---

I believe he was agreeing with my point as concerns quality of education.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by George Gervin's Afro

So the good teachers who go to higher paying school districts don't make any difference... mmm ok.

rebunked

---

That's not the same as a good teacher earning a merit increase....poor comparison.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TeyshaBlue

I believe he was agreeing with my point as concerns quality of education.

---

The notion that money has nothing to do with a quality education is preposterous. Is money the only thing that could change the system? No. Is gutting the education system the way to go? No.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TeyshaBlue

That's not the same as a good teacher earning a merit increase....poor comparison.

---

So is he for merit increases or against them? That's related to money... can we spend more to pay merit increases?

what property tax cuts? During 15 years in my current house, my prop taxes have just about doubled.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by George Gervin's Afro

So the good teachers who go to higher paying school districts don't make any difference... mmm ok.

rebunked

---

LMAO

You are assuming that the teachers in the "good" school districts make more than the teachers in the "bad" school districts.

In fact in any given region they all make pretty much the same. Example teachers in SAISD make pretty much what teachers in NEISD make.

The good teachers go to the good school districts so they don't have to put up with the crap students, not because they are paid more.

my sister teaches in a southside district. I asked her why down in that crappy area. She said they paid more.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by George Gervin's Afro

The notion that money has nothing to do with a quality education is preposterous. Is money the only thing that could change the system? No. Is gutting the education system the way to go? No.

---

If you can't quantify the effects of money on education, then you cannot with any intellectual honesty say that position is preposterous. What you could say is, "Hey, I don't really know what effects money has on quality education outside of it being a basic component."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by George Gervin's Afro

So is he for merit increases or against them? That's related to money... can we spend more to pay merit increases?

---

I dunno. Ask him.

In the context of your point concerning good teachers flocking to schools that pay well.....why do you suppose that is? Probably because there is no merit based pay system that works.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CosmicCowboy

LMAO

You are assuming that the teachers in the "good" school districts make more than the teachers in the "bad" school districts.

In fact in any given region they all make pretty much the same. Example teachers in SAISD make pretty much what teachers in NEISD make.

The good teachers go to the good school districts so they don't have to put up with the crap students, not because they are paid more.

---

That's a very local example. I can counter that with ease with local examples that are exactly the opposite.

The end result? You don't really know until you start digging in the data statewide.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TeyshaBlue

If you can't quantify the effects of money on education, then you cannot with any intellectual honesty say that position is preposterous. What you could say is, "Hey, I don't really know what effects money has on quality education outside of it being a basic component."

---

Quote:

---

"Hey, I don't really know what effects money has on quality education outside of it being a basic component.

---

My head asplode.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CosmicCowboy

Good...the school districts needed a wakeup call. Average district in Texas spends 80% of their money on shit not directly related to education.

---

While I will stop short of saying "bullshit", I find that highly unlikely without some very loose definitions of "related to education".

Link?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by clambake

its texas. eliminate all science classes.

---

SHHHHH. Don't give them any ideas.

Let's backup the truck here.

I think we can all agree that we aren't spending money as well as we could be by the simple extension that we're broke and our graduation rate ain't all that hot. Agreed?

That behind us, and assuming that a graduation rate is at least a metric of some concern, setting aside that it's not tied to quality of education in any meaningful way, how can we spend money more intelligently or efficiently?

I'll throw an idea out there....consolidate school districts.
The impact would be almost immediate. When I was teaching, I spent a fair amount of time in some small, West Texas schools. I taught in a small school system East of Lubbock on hwy 114. You could travel 26 miles on that highway and travel through 4 seperate school districts...each of which had enrollment < 1200 for the entire district! Yet, you had 4 completely separate administrative systems...bus maintenance facilities....quadruply duplicated physical plants....and this is the norm for rural Texas.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandomGuy

While I will stop short of saying "bullshit", I find that highly unlikely without some very loose definitions of "related to education".

Link?

---

OK, lets do the math.

Texas spent $11,084 per student in 2009

An average teacher made $47,000 a year and had at LEAST 22 students, so lets say that teacher cost $2136 per student.

That leaves us $8948.

OK, we need schools. Top of the line, class "A" office space (like lawyers, accountants, fortune 500 companies etc. use) right on loop 410 with all the bennies...parking garage, security, utilities paid, landscaping, etc. costs $24 a square foot a year. People build these complexes and operate and lease them AT A PROFIT for this amount. A 40' X 30' classroom would cost $28,800 (divided by 22 students) or $1309. per student.

That leaves us $7639.

What else? Want to give them all lunch for free? Is $5 a day enough? You can certainly get catered meals from Bill Millers for weddings for less...so 180 days X $5. Thats $900.

That leaves us $6739.

Want to buy each one a laptop? Thats another $600...

That leaves us $6139.

Miscellaneous school supplies, copies, report cards, etc? $300?

That leaves us $5839, or still OVER HALF LEFT of what we spend per kid.

You REALLY don't see anything wrong with this picture?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TeyshaBlue

My head asplode.

---

Happens on a weekly basis, it seems. Are you a Himalayan deity with a thousand heads? :lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Winehole23

Happens on a weekly basis, it seems. Are you a Himalayan deity with a thousand heads? :lol

---

:lol No. Just some poor sap that apparently regrows heads ala' Men in Black.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TeyshaBlue

If you can't quantify the effects of money on education, then you cannot with any intellectual honesty say that position is preposterous. What you could say is, "Hey, I don't really know what effects money has on quality education outside of it being a basic component."

---

You don't have to be a technocrat/statistician to understand the relationship between funding and class size, and being able to attract and maintain an experienced, qualified teaching staff. This is discussed in the article, is it not?

Frequently the importance of class size & teacher experience is dismissed (one can always find a study to fit one's needs) but I would think that if presented a choice, most parents would prefer that their kids receive more individualized attention from experienced teachers.

Quote:

---

Many school administrators blame the current budget crisis on an overhaul of the school finance system five years ago, which Mr. Perry and Republican leaders pushed through in response to popular anger over high property taxes. The Legislature put a cap on property taxes for schools and promised to make up the difference with a new business tax. But that tax has never produced enough revenue to make the districts’ budgets whole.

---

That about sums up what this manufactured crisis is all about, and who's responsible.

It's funny when wing-nuts use their own random numbers to prove their points....

Quote:

---

"Under current funding levels, Texas is already near the bottom in education funding per pupil (Texas ranks 44th nationally), " she said.

---

....

Quote:

---

the state ranked 44th in 2008-09, according to the report, averaging $8,610. That year, the top-spending state, New Jersey, averaged $16,253, and the lowest-spending state, Arizona, averaged $5,932. The national average: $10,313.

---

politifact

Quote:

---

Texas spends $7,561 per pupil $1,577 below National Average of $9,138

---

Link

Quote:

---

The comparison by the National Education Association, a teachers group — based on figures furnished by state education agencies — indicated that in the 2009-10 school year, Texas spent $9,227 per student, a figure that’s $1,359 below the national average.

That places Texas 37th in spending among the states and the District of Columbia. Ten years ago, Texas ranked 25th and was $281 below the national average.

---

Dallas Morning News

Wing-nuts ain't interested in solutions, just on blaming unions..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CosmicCowboy

OK, lets do the math.

Texas spent $11,084 per student in 2009

An average teacher made $47,000 a year and had at LEAST 22 students, so lets say that teacher cost $2136 per student.

That leaves us $8948.

OK, we need schools. Top of the line, class "A" office space (like lawyers, accountants, fortune 500 companies etc. use) right on loop 410 with all the bennies...parking garage, security, utilities paid, landscaping, etc. costs $24 a square foot a year. People build these complexes and operate and lease them AT A PROFIT for this amount. A 40' X 30' classroom would cost $28,800 (divided by 22 students) or $1309. per student.

That leaves us $7639.

What else? Want to give them all lunch for free? Is $5 a day enough? You can certainly get catered meals from Bill Millers for weddings for less...so 180 days X $5. Thats $900.

That leaves us $6739.

Want to buy each one a laptop? Thats another $600...

That leaves us $6139.

Miscellaneous school supplies, copies, report cards, etc? $300?

That leaves us $5839, or still OVER HALF LEFT of what we spend per kid.

You REALLY don't see anything wrong with this picture?

---

(winces)

What you have left out of your analysis:

1) I assume that you want hallways, lunchrooms, and gynasiums, and bathrooms for the children. Factor that in, because it is directly related to the ability to move children to the bathrooms etc. To keep track of enrolled students, vaccinations, attendence etc, one needs at least a little office space for administration as well. Unless of course you want teachers doing all of this, you need this to keep the teachers teaching.

2) We can also assume that for any given school two janitors to take out the trash are needed. Unless you want the teachers to take time away from teaching to take out trash, clean up vomit, and scrub the toilets for the little dears.

3) Now, in order to get kids to the school so that you can teach them in the first place, you need buses and drivers. Unless you want the teachers doing this.

4) Those classrooms, if you want niceties like water and electricity also require utilities.

5) If you want the teachers to be filling out the W-4's, hiring and firing, as opposed to teaching you also need accounting clerks, and HR, and etc, etc, etc.

All of this might not be directly related to teaching, but unless you want your teachers doing everything but teaching, all of this seemingly non-related activity suddenly becomes a lot more important.

Do you think that teachers can teach effectively if they have to prepare food, mop hallways, conduct repairs, make hiring and firing decisions, take out the trash, track truancy, drive kids to and from school, and do payroll?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandomGuy

Do you think that teachers can teach effectively if they have to prepare food, mop hallways, conduct repairs, make hiring and firing decisions, take out the trash, track truancy, drive kids to and from school, and do payroll?

---

Not to mention buy classroom materials for their student out of their own pockets, as most teachers end up having to do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CosmicCowboy

Good...the school districts needed a wakeup call. Average district in Texas spends 80% of their money on shit not directly related to education.

---

Good? If you really had ANY fucking idea what you were talking about you would ashamed. My mother works in one of the worst schools in Ft. Worth. They don't have enough money to buy ink cartridges for the printers. The magnet kids (honor students) would not have the chance to compete in UIL academic competitions if it weren't for my mother spending HER OWN MONEY to rent a van on weekends. The worst part is that she'll likely get laid off because of this. She is one of the many that sacrifices so much for those kids. As always, the teachers are taken for granted here and will be among the first to suffer state budget cuts.


Evidently, you're a giant tool that speaks without thinking so I doubt you possess the ability to admit when you're wrong. Don't reply to my post.

I have no idea what academic competitions you're talking about but why is it we feel the need to furnish our kids with laptops by 6th grade yet they can't do an academic competition over the internet? Its just as educational slicing a virtual frog up (strongly disagree) but we can't use that tech to save money? It seems to be mainly for novelty use. Around here the activities seem to involve more and more traveling all the time, be it sports or theatre.

What one person perceives as "not directly related" may be completely off the wall to another.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nbadan

Dallas Morning News

Wing-nuts ain't interested in solutions, just on blaming unions..

---

Ok. Thanks for all the solutions you brought to the discussion.:rolleyes

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandomGuy

(winces)

What you have left out of your analysis:

1) I assume that you want hallways, lunchrooms, and gynasiums, and bathrooms for the children. Factor that in, because it is directly related to the ability to move children to the bathrooms etc. To keep track of enrolled students, vaccinations, attendence etc, one needs at least a little office space for administration as well. Unless of course you want teachers doing all of this, you need this to keep the teachers teaching.

2) We can also assume that for any given school two janitors to take out the trash are needed. Unless you want the teachers to take time away from teaching to take out trash, clean up vomit, and scrub the toilets for the little dears.

3) Now, in order to get kids to the school so that you can teach them in the first place, you need buses and drivers. Unless you want the teachers doing this.

4) Those classrooms, if you want niceties like water and electricity also require utilities.

5) If you want the teachers to be filling out the W-4's, hiring and firing, as opposed to teaching you also need accounting clerks, and HR, and etc, etc, etc.

All of this might not be directly related to teaching, but unless you want your teachers doing everything but teaching, all of this seemingly non-related activity suddenly becomes a lot more important.

Do you think that teachers can teach effectively if they have to prepare food, mop hallways, conduct repairs, make hiring and firing decisions, take out the trash, track truancy, drive kids to and from school, and do payroll?

---

What a fucking dumbass.

I used class A office space as a comparison. Maintenance, security, heat and a/c, water, janitorial, restrooms, toilet paper, landscaping, parking lot security, etc. is all provided for one flat price in beautiful modern buildings in prime locations. Schools should actually cost much less.

Only thing not included is a lunch room. Big fucking deal.

Most INTELLIGENT people got that it was a comparison of what the private sector routinely provides for that price.

And yes, I left out overhead. Most INTELLIGENT posters realized that there was still an obscene amount of money remaining for random overhead, which is EXACTLY where most of our education dollars go...useless overhead.

I understand what you're saying sickdsm. I don't think they have laptops for any students, just shared desktops at school. If there are, then yeah that's not very logical. My main issue is that the state is cutting budget instead of reviewing finances, much like you said. But for some reason the teachers must face the consequences. They aren't the ones that make decisions on school equipment. Honestly, I'd like to know who does. Here's a ridiculous example:

As I was saying earlier, FWISD will not fund my mother's school (Morningside Middle School) for new ink cartridges for the printers. FWISD decided it was best to send printers of one specific brand to the school. Now the district has decided that this model is faulty in some cases, thus further spending on them is illogical (aka buying more ink). Although many printers are functional and continue to be, their logic is to treat the printers as a complete loss.

...come on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Halberto

I understand what you're saying sickdsm. I don't think they have laptops for any students, just shared desktops at school. If there are, then yeah that's not very logical. My main issue is that the state is cutting budget instead of reviewing finances, much like you said. But for some reason the teachers must face the consequences. They aren't the ones that make decisions on school equipment. Honestly, I'd like to know who does. Here's a ridiculous example:

As I was saying earlier, FWISD will not fund my mother's school (Morningside Middle School) for new ink cartridges for the printers. FWISD decided it was best to send printers of one specific brand to the school. Now the district has decided that this model is faulty in some cases, thus further spending on them is illogical (aka buying more ink). Although many printers are functional and continue to be, their logic is to treat the printers as a complete loss.

...come on.

---

The teachers face the consequences because they get fucked over by their bloat heavy, incompetent, school district management. Put the blame where it belongs.

Good... schools should be cut... 3/4 of people aren't worth the education anyway...

What good does teaching HS math to someone who will only be able to understand it at a 6th grade level do anyway?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Halberto

I understand what you're saying sickdsm. I don't think they have laptops for any students, just shared desktops at school. If there are, then yeah that's not very logical. My main issue is that the state is cutting budget instead of reviewing finances, much like you said. But for some reason the teachers must face the consequences. They aren't the ones that make decisions on school equipment. Honestly, I'd like to know who does. Here's a ridiculous example:

As I was saying earlier, FWISD will not fund my mother's school (Morningside Middle School) for new ink cartridges for the printers. FWISD decided it was best to send printers of one specific brand to the school. Now the district has decided that this model is faulty in some cases, thus further spending on them is illogical (aka buying more ink). Although many printers are functional and continue to be, their logic is to treat the printers as a complete loss.

...come on.

---

That's a great point, Halberto. If citizens had any idea of how the money is spent, they'd be screaming like mashed cats. There's a real cottage industry out there that caters specifically to school systems. I remember wanting to use some of my annual budget for some audio gear for my classroom. I was instructed to order it from an approved vendor's catalog. $300 for a portable cassette player! Instead, I went to Best Buy and bought a decent boom box for $80.
I wonder just how hard the purchasing personnel work in some of these larger districts? We probably don't want to know what they paid for those printers in your example.:depressed

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sec24Row7

Good... schools should be cut... 3/4 of people aren't worth the education anyway...

What good does teaching HS math to someone who will only be able to understand it at a 6th grade level do anyway?

---

I totally agree. The current "college prep" school system is totally missing the needs of at least half the students. They simply find it irrelevant and either disrupt it or drop out.

We really need a three track high school system...

One system for the kids that are there to work hard, learn and try to get ahead in life.

One for the kids determined to be losers and start teaching them as early teens manual work skills like how to use tools safely and how to flip burgers, plus life skills like credit management, family planning, etc.

One for the kids that wise up and decide they don't want to be stupid all their life where they can "catch back up" and get back into the fast track "smart" program no matter what age they are.

The system needs to quit wasting money trying to pound square pegs through round holes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CosmicCowboy

I totally agree. The current "college prep" school system is totally missing the needs of at least half the students. They simply find it irrelevant and either disrupt it or drop out.

We really need a three track high school system...

One system for the kids that are there to work hard, learn and try to get ahead in life.

One for the kids determined to be losers and start teaching them as early teens manual work skills like how to use tools safely and how to flip burgers, plus life skills like credit management, family planning, etc.

One for the kids that wise up and decide they don't want to be stupid all their life where they can "catch back up" and get back into the fast track "smart" program no matter what age they are.

The system needs to quit wasting money trying to pound square pegs through round holes.

---

I acutally agree with this.. of course it's going to cost lots of money...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by George Gervin's Afro

I acutally agree with this.. of course it's going to cost lots of money...

---

We did this pretty well prior to the 80's.

Some school districts still do this pretty well today (Birdville ISD).
http://schools.birdvilleschools.net/...e/default.asp#



And yeah...it costs boatloads of cash.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CosmicCowboy

I totally agree. The current "college prep" school system is totally missing the needs of at least half the students. They simply find it irrelevant and either disrupt it or drop out.

We really need a three track high school system...

One system for the kids that are there to work hard, learn and try to get ahead in life.

One for the kids determined to be losers and start teaching them as early teens manual work skills like how to use tools safely and how to flip burgers, plus life skills like credit management, family planning, etc.

One for the kids that wise up and decide they don't want to be stupid all their life where they can "catch back up" and get back into the fast track "smart" program no matter what age they are.

The system needs to quit wasting money trying to pound square pegs through round holes.

---

:tu

Definitely agree.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CosmicCowboy

Good...the school districts needed a wakeup call. Average district in Texas spends 80% of their money on shit not directly related to education.

---

How much of that is related to sports, ie football? :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LnGrrrR

How much of that is related to sports, ie football? :)

---

Probably quite a bit. School districts have no problems coughing up tens of millions of dollars for new football stadiums.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CosmicCowboy

I agree. there is NO relationship between dollars spent and educational delivered.

---

Well, there's SOME correlation I'm assuming. For instance, a thousand dollars is probably better than no dollars.

The question is more liekly when does money stop having an impact (the tipping point).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TeyshaBlue

I'll throw an idea out there....consolidate school districts.
The impact would be almost immediate. When I was teaching, I spent a fair amount of time in some small, West Texas schools. I taught in a small school system East of Lubbock on hwy 114. You could travel 26 miles on that highway and travel through 4 seperate school districts...each of which had enrollment < 1200 for the entire district! Yet, you had 4 completely separate administrative systems...bus maintenance facilities....quadruply duplicated physical plants....and this is the norm for rural Texas.

---

That's happening here in Hawaii. The state doesn't have money to provide for many schools it seems... they have something called "Furlough Friday" where the first Friday of the year kids get off, to save money on teacher salaries IIRC.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TeyshaBlue

I'll throw an idea out there....consolidate school districts.
The impact would be almost immediate. When I was teaching, I spent a fair amount of time in some small, West Texas schools. I taught in a small school system East of Lubbock on hwy 114. You could travel 26 miles on that highway and travel through 4 seperate school districts...each of which had enrollment < 1200 for the entire district! Yet, you had 4 completely separate administrative systems...bus maintenance facilities....quadruply duplicated physical plants....and this is the norm for rural Texas.

---

I remember hearing that some state rep introduced a bill that would do exactly that. His plan was one school district per county.

I see people being "outraged" whenever any aspect of the school system is cut, regardless of its impact.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CosmicCowboy

I totally agree. The current "college prep" school system is totally missing the needs of at least half the students. They simply find it irrelevant and either disrupt it or drop out.

We really need a three track high school system...

One system for the kids that are there to work hard, learn and try to get ahead in life.

One for the kids determined to be losers and start teaching them as early teens manual work skills like how to use tools safely and how to flip burgers, plus life skills like credit management, family planning, etc.

One for the kids that wise up and decide they don't want to be stupid all their life where they can "catch back up" and get back into the fast track "smart" program no matter what age they are.

The system needs to quit wasting money trying to pound square pegs through round holes.

---

Pretty much agree with most of what you say other than calling non-college students losers and teaching them to flip burgers. Food is so mechanized now that there's no need for any kind of training there. McDonald's and their assembly-line model for food ended that. Plumbing, auto shop, sheet metal, electric work, truck driving... these are the kind of things that our schools would do well to teach those who are currently slipping through the cracks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TeyshaBlue

That's a great point, Halberto. If citizens had any idea of how the money is spent, they'd be screaming like mashed cats. There's a real cottage industry out there that caters specifically to school systems. I remember wanting to use some of my annual budget for some audio gear for my classroom. I was instructed to order it from an approved vendor's catalog. $300 for a portable cassette player! Instead, I went to Best Buy and bought a decent boom box for $80.
I wonder just how hard the purchasing personnel work in some of these larger districts? We probably don't want to know what they paid for those printers in your example.:depressed

---

Completely agree...contractors rip off the school districts because they pay..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TeyshaBlue

Ok. Thanks for all the solutions you brought to the discussion.:rolleyes

---

???

I've posted my thoughts in several previous education threads.

1. No child left behind is a joke. It holds every kid behind because teachers have to cater to the most needy, all the time.....and inclusion? really? insecurity discipline problems meet sub-pop in every class? I honestly believe that public schools are being set up for failure....the standard is set so unrealistically high, according to NCLB, almost every school in TX and the US will not be meeting AYP by 2014..that's big money to school districts...

....many public schools would be doing good to very good if you did not hold kids with special needs to unrealistic standards...and it's gonna get worse... pretty soon TX will require students from Mexico who speak no English to count against schools when they fail the TAKS because they don't read or understand English.....cooking the numbers indeed....

Perry and his greedy cronies can't wait to get a cut of that education money pie, fuck the kids and their best interest...cook the books!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by baseline bum

Pretty much agree with most of what you say other than calling non-college students losers and teaching them to flip burgers. Food is so mechanized now that there's no need for any kind of training there. McDonald's and their assembly-line model for food ended that. Plumbing, auto shop, sheet metal, electric work, truck driving... these are the kind of things that our schools would do well to teach those who are currently slipping through the cracks.

---

I was ready to say the same thing bum but i stopped when i realized he called them losers, not non college students. I had to agree with him when i realized that. A lot of kids that don't go to school are not losers, just as the same a high number of college kids and graduates at that ARE the losers i think he's describing.

Does the role of High School need to be to prepare you for a trade or to educate as much as possible? We might be better off in society to teach more shop classes but do we owe ourselves to try to push more of the three R's? I would have loved a class on electronics, had I had a class that touched on that, i probably would have went on for EE. A lot of students DON'T know what they want to do or what they are good at for at least a few years after graduating HS. I think the military could serve a more useful purpose that role.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nbadan

???

I've posted my thoughts in several previous education threads.

1. No child left behind is a joke. It holds every kid behind because teachers have to cater to the most needy, all the time.....and inclusion? really? insecurity discipline problems meet sub-pop in every class? I honestly believe that public schools are being set up for failure....the standard is set so unrealistically high, according to NCLB, almost every school in TX and the US will not be meeting AYP by 2014..that's big money to school districts...

....many public schools would be doing good to very good if you did not hold kids with special needs to unrealistic standards...and it's gonna get worse... pretty soon TX will require students from Mexico who speak no English to count against schools when they fail the TAKS because they don't read or understand English.....cooking the numbers indeed....

Perry and his greedy cronies can't wait to get a cut of that education money pie, fuck the kids and their best interest...cook the books!

---

I felt that when I went to school well before NCLB. It got boring fast. 5-9 grades I feel are important in developing that hunger for education.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sickdsm

I felt that when I went to school well before NCLB. It got boring fast. 5-9 grades I feel are important in developing that hunger for education.

---

I agree...many teachers want to stick with old ways that don't work anymore...classrooms should become much more technologically efficient and cater to how kids like to learn today, with immediate feedback, rather than spending money on old school learning...namely, over-priced boring textbooks and a specialists for everything...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sickdsm

I felt that when I went to school well before NCLB. It got boring fast. 5-9 grades I feel are important in developing that hunger for education.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nbadan

I agree...many teachers want to stick with old ways that don't work anymore...classrooms should become much more technologically efficient and cater to how kids like to learn today, with immediate feedback, rather than spending money on old school learning...namely, over-priced boring textbooks and a specialists for everything...

---

Schools would do really well to stop concentrating so much on rote memorization, formulas, and long homework assignments that are just drills and don't require much in the way of thought. This is especially true in the early years when children tend to have a more physical and spatial than logical mindset. Though I think the straight logic way of teaching math at the high school level is pretty ridiculous too. I think requiring teachers to take more education classes and only a lite version of their major is partly responsible for that though. It's hard to make others see math as more than just numbers and formulas if you yourself haven't taken the difficult classes on group theory, algebraic topology, analysis in metric spaces and/or at least n-dimensional Euclidean spaces, and so on that really build strong spatial intuition that could be imparted to young minds. It's amazing how much a clear diagram can simplify a lot of very complex mathematical ideas, even in extremely abstract settings.

Quote:

---

It's hard to make others see math as more than just numbers and formulas if you yourself haven't taken the difficult classes on group theory, algebraic topology, analysis in metric spaces and/or at least n-dimensional Euclidean spaces, and so on that really build strong spatial intuition that could be imparted to young minds. It's amazing how much a clear diagram can simplify a lot of very complex mathematical ideas, even in extremely abstract settings.

---

given the difference in pay between a teacher and a physicists or engineer...I don't know why anyone who has taken more than differential equations 2 would ever teach, especially because high school math teachers already must take more math than 95% of all jobs...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nbadan

given the difference in pay between a teacher and a physicists or engineer...I don't know why anyone who has taken more than differential equations 2 would ever teach, especially because high school math teachers already must take more math than 95% of all jobs...

---

Because they might like it? Not for me, though; especially after hearing horror stories from my friends who work(ed) in LA Unified (one of them actually dragged some HS kid out the room by his ankles when he wouldn't quit talking shit :lol).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by baseline bum

Because they might like it? Not for me, though; especially after hearing horror stories from my friends who work(ed) in LA Unified (one of them actually dragged some HS kid out the room by his ankles when he wouldn't quit talking shit :lol).

---

I could see it if the salary was 65K and above, but not for a piddly 45K....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nbadan

I could see it if the salary was 65K and above, but not for a piddly 45K....

---

People want to teach or they don't. Perpetually raising teacher salaries will only attract people who want higher paychecks, regardless of their ability. If we weren't a nation built on egalitarian idealism, I'd say CosmicCowboy is right in suggesting a semi-British educational system. Lawd knows we've found ways to be classists without the framework of our educations.

As for the notion of rewarding meritorious teachers with higher pay... it sounds great until you ask yourself according to what metric will merit be determined? No Child Left Behind policies? TASP and SAT tests? As long as there's a trivium, psychometrics will remain a joke, and there's plenty to suggest that learning geometry (for a quadrivium example) outside of it's historical context results in people who cannot think and solve problems, only regurgitate and ask for help.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TeyshaBlue

That's a great point, Halberto. If citizens had any idea of how the money is spent, they'd be screaming like mashed cats. There's a real cottage industry out there that caters specifically to school systems. I remember wanting to use some of my annual budget for some audio gear for my classroom. I was instructed to order it from an approved vendor's catalog. $300 for a portable cassette player! Instead, I went to Best Buy and bought a decent boom box for $80.
I wonder just how hard the purchasing personnel work in some of these larger districts? We probably don't want to know what they paid for those printers in your example.:depressed

---

I don't doubt your experience but I wonder if it is as prevalent as you insinuate. Easy to paint with a broad brush, is it not?
My mother worked as an admin in a large school district for 30 years and this certainly was not her experience. Rather it was more characterized by counter-productive/petty levels of red tape and unnecessary/overkill oversight.

As an aside and painting with a broad brush of my own, I've worked in education and the corporate America (Microsoft & Boeing), and there's nothing as wasteful as a big company (next to the US Military I suppose).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Capt Bringdown

I don't doubt your experience but I wonder if it is as prevalent as you insinuate. Easy to paint with a broad brush, is it not?
My mother worked as an admin in a large school district for 30 years and this certainly was not her experience. Rather it was more characterized by counter-productive/petty levels of red tape and unnecessary/overkill oversight.

As an aside and painting with a broad brush of my own, I've worked in education and the corporate America (Microsoft & Boeing), and there's nothing as wasteful as a big company (next to the US Military I suppose).

---

Yeah, I've no other examples to use..just the few school districts I taught in. It's almost a certainty that there are ISDs that are on top of this to balance out the one's who seem to be clueless. It was just shocking, to me, to see how nonchalantly the budget was handled in the few experiences I've had. That there was seemingly little resistance to overspending made me wonder if that's a culture within education itself. But, in the end, I don't know what I don't know...so my experiences really can't be considered as a macro view of what happens across the country.:toast

Looks like this might be one of those ISD's that know how to handle their cash....

Find out why no dramatic cuts are needed at HEB ISD

Have you driven through Hurst, Euless and Bedford lately?


Does the greater FTW area near downtown look like it has lots of money to waste right now?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sickdsm

I see people being "outraged" whenever any aspect of the school system is cut, regardless of its impact.

---

Platitudinous. In other news, the sky is blue.

The natives get nervous when you start to take away their goodies. Basically agree.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Winehole23

Have you driven through Hurst, Euless and Bedford lately?


Does the greater FTW area near downtown look like it has lots of money to waste right now?

---

I drive thru Bedford on the way to work. Somedays, I'll pass thru Hurst depending on traffic. Nice burbs. I live a bit north of them.

Downtown FTW has money to burn.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Randomguy

Do you think that teachers can teach effectively if they have to prepare food, mop hallways, conduct repairs, make hiring and firing decisions, take out the trash, track truancy, drive kids to and from school, and do payroll?

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CosmicCowboy

What a fucking dumbass.

I used class A office space as a comparison. Maintenance, security, heat and a/c, water, janitorial, restrooms, toilet paper, landscaping, parking lot security, etc. is all provided for one flat price in beautiful modern buildings in prime locations. Schools should actually cost much less.

Only thing not included is a lunch room. Big fucking deal.

Most INTELLIGENT people got that it was a comparison of what the private sector routinely provides for that price.

And yes, I left out overhead. Most INTELLIGENT posters realized that there was still an obscene amount of money remaining for random overhead, which is EXACTLY where most of our education dollars go...useless overhead.

---

Meh. I was unfamiliar with a specific real estate term "class A". If you want to be an asshole about that, feel free to do so. Not the first mistake I have ever made, and it won't be the last.

Regardless of whether or not utilities are included, your comparison is still so imprecise as to be litte more than an exercise in your confirmation bias, unless you actually do some work and show roughly how many square feet any given school has, rather than pulling some figure out of thin air.

I have no doubt that there is some unneeded overhead in many school districts.

BUT

Your point still falls short, in my opinion, because there are a lot of things that MUST happen to allow teachers to actually teach.

I do doubt that the amount of overhead is "obscene".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TeyshaBlue

I drive thru Bedford on the way to work. Somedays, I'll pass thru Hurst depending on traffic. Nice burbs. I live a bit north of them.

Downtown FTW has money to burn.

---

I stand gratefully corrected.

Why does it still look like shit, then? :lol:toast

(ugly highway is not the town's fault)

Sorry about the knock on your hood, TeyshaB. It was based on my own trivial familiarity with the area. Totally lighthearted and not sincerely meant.

(repents in sackcloth and ashes, and so forth)

(open to the idea that HEB is prosperous and cool, and downtown FTW is happening)

(likes FTW, fwiw)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Winehole23

Sorry about the knock on your hood, TeyshaB. It was based on my own trivial familiarity with the area. Totally lighthearted and not sincerely meant.

---

lol...I didn't take it in any negative light. I thought you were actually curious.:lol


It's just typical suburbia...nothing particularly special. But, downtown FTW, like Down town SA, has it goin on. Sundance square in particular is pretty effin' cool.:toast

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Winehole23

(ugly highway is not the town's fault)

---

We do have a shitload of ugly highways, loops, etc...tho. Hell, Lubbock, Abilene, San Angelo...all have better loop systems than Ft. Worth.:lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Winehole23

(ugly highway is not the town's fault)

---

:lol

Yeah, that stretch of 121/183 on your way to the airport doesn't paint a very flattering picture of HEB. Glad to hear that it's not a totally representative view of the area.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by coyotes_geek

:lol

Yeah, that stretch of 121/183 on your way to the airport doesn't paint a very flattering picture of HEB. Glad to hear that it's not a totally representative view of the area.

---

We don't like yer kind here.:ihit

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TeyshaBlue

We don't like yer kind here.:ihit

---

Unless yer packin' a banjo. Then, let the britches drop!:lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TeyshaBlue

We don't like yer kind here.:ihit

---

Why do you think I'm on my way to the airport! :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TeyshaBlue

We do have a shitload of ugly highways, loops, etc...tho. Hell, Lubbock, Abilene, San Angelo...all have better loop systems than Ft. Worth.:lol

---

Come to Austin. We have more non-loop "loops" than any city in the nation.