See Dick think. He is not like Jane.

"Lesa" wrote in message
...

"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message
ink.net...

In my area the "All funds" school budget exceeds $12,000 per student per
year and the teachers union claims that is not enough money and wants
more.

Do you realize all the areas to which that money needs to go? That
$12,000
pays for the building, the utilities for the building, books and other
teaching materials, materials for making copies of student information,
teacher salaries (and at the middle school/high school level that could be
8-10 teachers per student), salaries for support staff (cooks, custodians,
principal, office staff, nurses), medical supplies for the school health
room and sports teams, registration fees for sports teams (some of which
exceed $200/team), buses for sports teams and field trips, admission for
field trips and other special events, insurance for the school building,
repairs/maintenance for the school building, a significant portion of
school
lunches, and I'm certain more that I can't think of right now, which does
include benefits for district employees . That $12,000 is not simply for
a
teacher's salary, and it does not go very far..

Good list. Some of those items are funded from additional revenue sources
like student participation fees. Unfortunately, not on the list are the
worse offenders - employee benefits and administration costs.

$12,000 per student times approximately 36,000 students is well over $400
million per year for the local school budget. The last school budget was
$428 million. The problem isn't how much money there is available. The
problem is how the available money is spent.

Take for instance the three major findings in an independent study about my
local school district. 1.) More money goes out to state education
equalization programs than we receive in return. If we pay more we don't
keep it for the local schools. 2.) Special and alternative spending far
exceeds the inflation rate. We try to teach in 71 different languages. 3.)
Regular program funding does not keep up with inflation. Why aren't regular
programs for the three R's funded first?

The underlying problem is PERS. In my state PERS needs 19.5% of payroll to
keep up. The legislature came up with PERS reform to cut the contributions
to 11.1%. The state supreme court said the legislature couldn't do that.
So as a taxpayer I say I have no desire to put more money into the schools
until solutions are in place to stop throwing good money after bad.

PERS is so out of control in my state school administrators are taking early
retirement at 120% of their current salaries and then being hired back as
"consultants" to do the job they are retired from. But because they no
longer have all the benefits, their consulting contract gets grossed up to
compensate for the loss of benefits. By retiring school administrators
increase their pay by close to 300%. Would you pay more money for that type
of nonsense?


And why are the teachers unions so adamantly against the No Child Left
Behind law? Because the teacher unions want to protect poor performing
teachers from being held accountable for their results through
performance
standards.

Actually, most teachers are opposed to NCLB because they require mandated
standardized testing and as a result require basing your curriculum around
this test rather than being able to teach things that are significant to
your student, or things which are of interest to a majority of your
students. In addition the cost of purchasing, administering, scoring and
reporting those tests is left primarily to the district. The small amount
of funds provided by the federal government comes nowhere near the amount
of
costs incurred. NCLB is causing *more* children to be left behind.

Yeah! To heck with the three R's. We need to teach students how to put
condoms on cucumbers, how to understand Muslim beliefs, how to be accepting
of the gay/lesbian lifestyle, how to celebrate Kwansaa, etc. My state is in
the process of seeking a waiver from NCLB so we can use our own Certificate
of Initial Mastery (CIM) and Certificate of Advanced Mastery (CAM). How can
state run programs be "good" and federal programs that do the same thing be
"bad"? At least the federal program is consistent across the states. The
state programs are heavily influenced by the teachers union and there is no
understanding of state programs outside of the state.

"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message
k.net...

"Lesa" wrote in message
...

"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message
ink.net...

In my area the "All funds" school budget exceeds $12,000 per student
per
year and the teachers union claims that is not enough money and wants
more.

Do you realize all the areas to which that money needs to go? That
$12,000
pays for the building, the utilities for the building, books and other
teaching materials, materials for making copies of student information,
teacher salaries (and at the middle school/high school level that could
be
8-10 teachers per student), salaries for support staff (cooks,
custodians,
principal, office staff, nurses), medical supplies for the school
health
room and sports teams, registration fees for sports teams (some of
which
exceed $200/team), buses for sports teams and field trips, admission
for
field trips and other special events, insurance for the school
building,
repairs/maintenance for the school building, a significant portion of
school
lunches, and I'm certain more that I can't think of right now, which
does
include benefits for district employees . That $12,000 is not simply
for
a
teacher's salary, and it does not go very far..

Good list. Some of those items are funded from additional revenue
sources
like student participation fees. Unfortunately, not on the list are the
worse offenders - employee benefits and administration costs.

$12,000 per student times approximately 36,000 students is well over
$400
million per year for the local school budget. The last school budget was
$428 million. The problem isn't how much money there is available. The
problem is how the available money is spent.

Take for instance the three major findings in an independent study about
my
local school district. 1.) More money goes out to state education
equalization programs than we receive in return. If we pay more we
don't
keep it for the local schools. 2.) Special and alternative spending
far
exceeds the inflation rate. We try to teach in 71 different languages.
3.)
Regular program funding does not keep up with inflation. Why aren't
regular
programs for the three R's funded first?

The underlying problem is PERS. In my state PERS needs 19.5% of payroll
to
keep up. The legislature came up with PERS reform to cut the
contributions
to 11.1%. The state supreme court said the legislature couldn't do
that.
So as a taxpayer I say I have no desire to put more money into the
schools
until solutions are in place to stop throwing good money after bad.

PERS is so out of control in my state school administrators are taking
early
retirement at 120% of their current salaries and then being hired back
as
"consultants" to do the job they are retired from. But because they no
longer have all the benefits, their consulting contract gets grossed up
to
compensate for the loss of benefits. By retiring school administrators
increase their pay by close to 300%. Would you pay more money for that
type
of nonsense?


And why are the teachers unions so adamantly against the No Child
Left
Behind law? Because the teacher unions want to protect poor
performing
teachers from being held accountable for their results through
performance
standards.

Actually, most teachers are opposed to NCLB because they require
mandated
standardized testing and as a result require basing your curriculum
around
this test rather than being able to teach things that are significant
to
your student, or things which are of interest to a majority of your
students. In addition the cost of purchasing, administering, scoring
and
reporting those tests is left primarily to the district. The small
amount
of funds provided by the federal government comes nowhere near the
amount
of
costs incurred. NCLB is causing *more* children to be left behind.

Yeah! To heck with the three R's. We need to teach students how to put
condoms on cucumbers, how to understand Muslim beliefs, how to be
accepting
of the gay/lesbian lifestyle, how to celebrate Kwansaa, etc. My state
is in
the process of seeking a waiver from NCLB so we can use our own
Certificate
of Initial Mastery (CIM) and Certificate of Advanced Mastery (CAM). How
can
state run programs be "good" and federal programs that do the same thing
be
"bad"? At least the federal program is consistent across the states.
The
state programs are heavily influenced by the teachers union and there is
no
understanding of state programs outside of the state.


My daughter's H.S. school tuition runs about 6k a year, the school has
about 700 students and is in the black. It is college prep, so it doesn't
have all the unnecessary facilites......pool, shop, etc. No superitendant
and staff skimming money off the top, no screw ball classes. The building
is almost 50 years old, and looks almost brand new, it has been paid off
for years.......none of the tear down and rebuilt crap.......it is amazing
what you can get by on when you are not spending "other people's money"

"P. Fritz" wrote in message
...

"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message
k.net...

"Lesa" wrote in message
...

"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message
ink.net...

In my area the "All funds" school budget exceeds $12,000 per
student
per
year and the teachers union claims that is not enough money and
wants
more.

Do you realize all the areas to which that money needs to go? That
$12,000
pays for the building, the utilities for the building, books and
other
teaching materials, materials for making copies of student
information,
teacher salaries (and at the middle school/high school level that
could
be
8-10 teachers per student), salaries for support staff (cooks,
custodians,
principal, office staff, nurses), medical supplies for the school
health
room and sports teams, registration fees for sports teams (some of
which
exceed $200/team), buses for sports teams and field trips, admission
for
field trips and other special events, insurance for the school
building,
repairs/maintenance for the school building, a significant portion of
school
lunches, and I'm certain more that I can't think of right now, which
does
include benefits for district employees . That $12,000 is not simply
for
a
teacher's salary, and it does not go very far..

Good list. Some of those items are funded from additional revenue
sources
like student participation fees. Unfortunately, not on the list are
the
worse offenders - employee benefits and administration costs.

$12,000 per student times approximately 36,000 students is well over
$400
million per year for the local school budget. The last school budget
was
$428 million. The problem isn't how much money there is available.
The
problem is how the available money is spent.

Take for instance the three major findings in an independent study
about
my
local school district. 1.) More money goes out to state education
equalization programs than we receive in return. If we pay more we
don't
keep it for the local schools. 2.) Special and alternative spending
far
exceeds the inflation rate. We try to teach in 71 different
languages.
3.)
Regular program funding does not keep up with inflation. Why aren't
regular
programs for the three R's funded first?

The underlying problem is PERS. In my state PERS needs 19.5% of
payroll
to
keep up. The legislature came up with PERS reform to cut the
contributions
to 11.1%. The state supreme court said the legislature couldn't do
that.
So as a taxpayer I say I have no desire to put more money into the
schools
until solutions are in place to stop throwing good money after bad.

PERS is so out of control in my state school administrators are taking
early
retirement at 120% of their current salaries and then being hired back
as
"consultants" to do the job they are retired from. But because they
no
longer have all the benefits, their consulting contract gets grossed
up
to
compensate for the loss of benefits. By retiring school
administrators
increase their pay by close to 300%. Would you pay more money for
that
type
of nonsense?


And why are the teachers unions so adamantly against the No Child
Left
Behind law? Because the teacher unions want to protect poor
performing
teachers from being held accountable for their results through
performance
standards.

Actually, most teachers are opposed to NCLB because they require
mandated
standardized testing and as a result require basing your curriculum
around
this test rather than being able to teach things that are significant
to
your student, or things which are of interest to a majority of your
students. In addition the cost of purchasing, administering, scoring
and
reporting those tests is left primarily to the district. The small
amount
of funds provided by the federal government comes nowhere near the
amount
of
costs incurred. NCLB is causing *more* children to be left behind.

Yeah! To heck with the three R's. We need to teach students how to
put
condoms on cucumbers, how to understand Muslim beliefs, how to be
accepting
of the gay/lesbian lifestyle, how to celebrate Kwansaa, etc. My state
is in
the process of seeking a waiver from NCLB so we can use our own
Certificate
of Initial Mastery (CIM) and Certificate of Advanced Mastery (CAM).
How
can
state run programs be "good" and federal programs that do the same
thing
be
"bad"? At least the federal program is consistent across the states.
The
state programs are heavily influenced by the teachers union and there
is
no
understanding of state programs outside of the state.


My daughter's H.S. school tuition runs about 6k a year, the school has
about 700 students and is in the black. It is college prep, so it doesn't
have all the unnecessary facilites......pool, shop, etc. No superitendant
and staff skimming money off the top, no screw ball classes. The building
is almost 50 years old, and looks almost brand new, it has been paid off
for years.......none of the tear down and rebuilt crap.......it is amazing
what you can get by on when you are not spending "other people's money"

Our school district purchased 30 pizza slicers to automate the pizza slicing
process on "Pizza Fridays". The new pizza slicers are not ordinary $5 pizza
slicers you can buy at the local store. No, those store-bought ordinary
pizza slicers take too long to slice pizzas and cause the students to wait
for lunch while the staff slices the pizzas. The school district's new
pizza slicers cost $1,200 each!

"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message
ink.net...

"P. Fritz" wrote in message
...

"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message
k.net...

"Lesa" wrote in message
...

"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message
ink.net...

In my area the "All funds" school budget exceeds $12,000 per
student
per
year and the teachers union claims that is not enough money and
wants
more.

Do you realize all the areas to which that money needs to go? That
$12,000
pays for the building, the utilities for the building, books and
other
teaching materials, materials for making copies of student
information,
teacher salaries (and at the middle school/high school level that
could
be
8-10 teachers per student), salaries for support staff (cooks,
custodians,
principal, office staff, nurses), medical supplies for the school
health
room and sports teams, registration fees for sports teams (some of
which
exceed $200/team), buses for sports teams and field trips,
admission
for
field trips and other special events, insurance for the school
building,
repairs/maintenance for the school building, a significant portion
of
school
lunches, and I'm certain more that I can't think of right now,
which
does
include benefits for district employees . That $12,000 is not
simply
for
a
teacher's salary, and it does not go very far..

Good list. Some of those items are funded from additional revenue
sources
like student participation fees. Unfortunately, not on the list are
the
worse offenders - employee benefits and administration costs.

$12,000 per student times approximately 36,000 students is well over
$400
million per year for the local school budget. The last school budget
was
$428 million. The problem isn't how much money there is available.
The
problem is how the available money is spent.

Take for instance the three major findings in an independent study
about
my
local school district. 1.) More money goes out to state education
equalization programs than we receive in return. If we pay more we
don't
keep it for the local schools. 2.) Special and alternative
spending
far
exceeds the inflation rate. We try to teach in 71 different
languages.
3.)
Regular program funding does not keep up with inflation. Why aren't
regular
programs for the three R's funded first?

The underlying problem is PERS. In my state PERS needs 19.5% of
payroll
to
keep up. The legislature came up with PERS reform to cut the
contributions
to 11.1%. The state supreme court said the legislature couldn't do
that.
So as a taxpayer I say I have no desire to put more money into the
schools
until solutions are in place to stop throwing good money after bad.

PERS is so out of control in my state school administrators are
taking
early
retirement at 120% of their current salaries and then being hired
back
as
"consultants" to do the job they are retired from. But because they
no
longer have all the benefits, their consulting contract gets grossed
up
to
compensate for the loss of benefits. By retiring school
administrators
increase their pay by close to 300%. Would you pay more money for
that
type
of nonsense?


And why are the teachers unions so adamantly against the No Child
Left
Behind law? Because the teacher unions want to protect poor
performing
teachers from being held accountable for their results through
performance
standards.

Actually, most teachers are opposed to NCLB because they require
mandated
standardized testing and as a result require basing your curriculum
around
this test rather than being able to teach things that are
significant
to
your student, or things which are of interest to a majority of your
students. In addition the cost of purchasing, administering,
scoring
and
reporting those tests is left primarily to the district. The small
amount
of funds provided by the federal government comes nowhere near the
amount
of
costs incurred. NCLB is causing *more* children to be left behind.

Yeah! To heck with the three R's. We need to teach students how to
put
condoms on cucumbers, how to understand Muslim beliefs, how to be
accepting
of the gay/lesbian lifestyle, how to celebrate Kwansaa, etc. My
state
is in
the process of seeking a waiver from NCLB so we can use our own
Certificate
of Initial Mastery (CIM) and Certificate of Advanced Mastery (CAM).
How
can
state run programs be "good" and federal programs that do the same
thing
be
"bad"? At least the federal program is consistent across the
states.
The
state programs are heavily influenced by the teachers union and
there
is
no
understanding of state programs outside of the state.


My daughter's H.S. school tuition runs about 6k a year, the school has
about 700 students and is in the black. It is college prep, so it
doesn't
have all the unnecessary facilites......pool, shop, etc. No
superitendant
and staff skimming money off the top, no screw ball classes. The
building
is almost 50 years old, and looks almost brand new, it has been paid
off
for years.......none of the tear down and rebuilt crap.......it is
amazing
what you can get by on when you are not spending "other people's money"

Our school district purchased 30 pizza slicers to automate the pizza
slicing
process on "Pizza Fridays". The new pizza slicers are not ordinary $5
pizza
slicers you can buy at the local store. No, those store-bought ordinary
pizza slicers take too long to slice pizzas and cause the students to wait
for lunch while the staff slices the pizzas. The school district's new
pizza slicers cost $1,200 each!

And someone said that 12K per student is not enough? LMAO

"P Fritz" wrote in message
...

"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message
ink.net...

"P. Fritz" wrote in message
...

"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message
k.net...

"Lesa" wrote in message
...

"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message
ink.net...

In my area the "All funds" school budget exceeds $12,000 per
student
per
year and the teachers union claims that is not enough money and
wants
more.

Do you realize all the areas to which that money needs to go?
That
$12,000
pays for the building, the utilities for the building, books and
other
teaching materials, materials for making copies of student
information,
teacher salaries (and at the middle school/high school level that
could
be
8-10 teachers per student), salaries for support staff (cooks,
custodians,
principal, office staff, nurses), medical supplies for the school
health
room and sports teams, registration fees for sports teams (some of
which
exceed $200/team), buses for sports teams and field trips,
admission
for
field trips and other special events, insurance for the school
building,
repairs/maintenance for the school building, a significant portion
of
school
lunches, and I'm certain more that I can't think of right now,
which
does
include benefits for district employees . That $12,000 is not
simply
for
a
teacher's salary, and it does not go very far..

Good list. Some of those items are funded from additional revenue
sources
like student participation fees. Unfortunately, not on the list
are
the
worse offenders - employee benefits and administration costs.

$12,000 per student times approximately 36,000 students is well
over
$400
million per year for the local school budget. The last school
budget
was
$428 million. The problem isn't how much money there is available.
The
problem is how the available money is spent.

Take for instance the three major findings in an independent study
about
my
local school district. 1.) More money goes out to state education
equalization programs than we receive in return. If we pay more we
don't
keep it for the local schools. 2.) Special and alternative
spending
far
exceeds the inflation rate. We try to teach in 71 different
languages.
3.)
Regular program funding does not keep up with inflation. Why
aren't
regular
programs for the three R's funded first?

The underlying problem is PERS. In my state PERS needs 19.5% of
payroll
to
keep up. The legislature came up with PERS reform to cut the
contributions
to 11.1%. The state supreme court said the legislature couldn't do
that.
So as a taxpayer I say I have no desire to put more money into the
schools
until solutions are in place to stop throwing good money after bad.

PERS is so out of control in my state school administrators are
taking
early
retirement at 120% of their current salaries and then being hired
back
as
"consultants" to do the job they are retired from. But because
they
no
longer have all the benefits, their consulting contract gets
grossed
up
to
compensate for the loss of benefits. By retiring school
administrators
increase their pay by close to 300%. Would you pay more money for
that
type
of nonsense?


And why are the teachers unions so adamantly against the No
Child
Left
Behind law? Because the teacher unions want to protect poor
performing
teachers from being held accountable for their results through
performance
standards.

Actually, most teachers are opposed to NCLB because they require
mandated
standardized testing and as a result require basing your
curriculum
around
this test rather than being able to teach things that are
significant
to
your student, or things which are of interest to a majority of
your
students. In addition the cost of purchasing, administering,
scoring
and
reporting those tests is left primarily to the district. The
small
amount
of funds provided by the federal government comes nowhere near the
amount
of
costs incurred. NCLB is causing *more* children to be left behind.

Yeah! To heck with the three R's. We need to teach students how
to
put
condoms on cucumbers, how to understand Muslim beliefs, how to be
accepting
of the gay/lesbian lifestyle, how to celebrate Kwansaa, etc. My
state
is in
the process of seeking a waiver from NCLB so we can use our own
Certificate
of Initial Mastery (CIM) and Certificate of Advanced Mastery (CAM).
How
can
state run programs be "good" and federal programs that do the same
thing
be
"bad"? At least the federal program is consistent across the
states.
The
state programs are heavily influenced by the teachers union and
there
is
no
understanding of state programs outside of the state.


My daughter's H.S. school tuition runs about 6k a year, the school
has
about 700 students and is in the black. It is college prep, so it
doesn't
have all the unnecessary facilites......pool, shop, etc. No
superitendant
and staff skimming money off the top, no screw ball classes. The
building
is almost 50 years old, and looks almost brand new, it has been paid
off
for years.......none of the tear down and rebuilt crap.......it is
amazing
what you can get by on when you are not spending "other people's money"

Our school district purchased 30 pizza slicers to automate the pizza
slicing
process on "Pizza Fridays". The new pizza slicers are not ordinary $5
pizza
slicers you can buy at the local store. No, those store-bought ordinary
pizza slicers take too long to slice pizzas and cause the students to
wait
for lunch while the staff slices the pizzas. The school district's new
pizza slicers cost $1,200 each!

And someone said that 12K per student is not enough? LMAO

$12K per student would be plenty, I'm sure, if it were actually spent on
students instead of pizza cutters. I work at a small school--the only
school in the district--with about 250 students. Believe it or not, we have
a superintendant (because the district will be growing some time in the next
few years), a principal, a business manager, plus a school secretary, and a
secretary for the business manager. They all got raises of 14 to 22 percent
last year because they "needed to have salaries comensurate with other
nearby districts." The teachers were told to "not compare their salaries
with nearby districts" because we are a small district. They all got the
newest computers, too, because their 2-year-old models just weren't good
enough any more. This is all on the record! If we could get rid of 1
superfluous administrator and 1 secretary and spend that money on the
students, perhaps we could actually spend it in the classroom where it would
benefit the students! It's not the money that is at issue. It's how the
money is spent!!

"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

"P Fritz" wrote in message
...

"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message
ink.net...

"P. Fritz" wrote in message
...

"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message
k.net...

"Lesa" wrote in message
...

"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message
ink.net...

In my area the "All funds" school budget exceeds $12,000 per
student
per
year and the teachers union claims that is not enough money
and
wants
more.

Do you realize all the areas to which that money needs to go?
That
$12,000
pays for the building, the utilities for the building, books and
other
teaching materials, materials for making copies of student
information,
teacher salaries (and at the middle school/high school level
that
could
be
8-10 teachers per student), salaries for support staff (cooks,
custodians,
principal, office staff, nurses), medical supplies for the
school
health
room and sports teams, registration fees for sports teams (some
of
which
exceed $200/team), buses for sports teams and field trips,
admission
for
field trips and other special events, insurance for the school
building,
repairs/maintenance for the school building, a significant
portion
of
school
lunches, and I'm certain more that I can't think of right now,
which
does
include benefits for district employees . That $12,000 is not
simply
for
a
teacher's salary, and it does not go very far..

Good list. Some of those items are funded from additional
revenue
sources
like student participation fees. Unfortunately, not on the list
are
the
worse offenders - employee benefits and administration costs.

$12,000 per student times approximately 36,000 students is well
over
$400
million per year for the local school budget. The last school
budget
was
$428 million. The problem isn't how much money there is
available.
The
problem is how the available money is spent.

Take for instance the three major findings in an independent
study
about
my
local school district. 1.) More money goes out to state
education
equalization programs than we receive in return. If we pay more
we
don't
keep it for the local schools. 2.) Special and alternative
spending
far
exceeds the inflation rate. We try to teach in 71 different
languages.
3.)
Regular program funding does not keep up with inflation. Why
aren't
regular
programs for the three R's funded first?

The underlying problem is PERS. In my state PERS needs 19.5% of
payroll
to
keep up. The legislature came up with PERS reform to cut the
contributions
to 11.1%. The state supreme court said the legislature couldn't
do
that.
So as a taxpayer I say I have no desire to put more money into
the
schools
until solutions are in place to stop throwing good money after
bad.

PERS is so out of control in my state school administrators are
taking
early
retirement at 120% of their current salaries and then being hired
back
as
"consultants" to do the job they are retired from. But because
they
no
longer have all the benefits, their consulting contract gets
grossed
up
to
compensate for the loss of benefits. By retiring school
administrators
increase their pay by close to 300%. Would you pay more money
for
that
type
of nonsense?


And why are the teachers unions so adamantly against the No
Child
Left
Behind law? Because the teacher unions want to protect poor
performing
teachers from being held accountable for their results through
performance
standards.

Actually, most teachers are opposed to NCLB because they require
mandated
standardized testing and as a result require basing your
curriculum
around
this test rather than being able to teach things that are
significant
to
your student, or things which are of interest to a majority of
your
students. In addition the cost of purchasing, administering,
scoring
and
reporting those tests is left primarily to the district. The
small
amount
of funds provided by the federal government comes nowhere near
the
amount
of
costs incurred. NCLB is causing *more* children to be left
behind.

Yeah! To heck with the three R's. We need to teach students how
to
put
condoms on cucumbers, how to understand Muslim beliefs, how to be
accepting
of the gay/lesbian lifestyle, how to celebrate Kwansaa, etc. My
state
is in
the process of seeking a waiver from NCLB so we can use our own
Certificate
of Initial Mastery (CIM) and Certificate of Advanced Mastery
(CAM).
How
can
state run programs be "good" and federal programs that do the
same
thing
be
"bad"? At least the federal program is consistent across the
states.
The
state programs are heavily influenced by the teachers union and
there
is
no
understanding of state programs outside of the state.


My daughter's H.S. school tuition runs about 6k a year, the school
has
about 700 students and is in the black. It is college prep, so it
doesn't
have all the unnecessary facilites......pool, shop, etc. No
superitendant
and staff skimming money off the top, no screw ball classes. The
building
is almost 50 years old, and looks almost brand new, it has been paid
off
for years.......none of the tear down and rebuilt crap.......it is
amazing
what you can get by on when you are not spending "other people's
money"

Our school district purchased 30 pizza slicers to automate the pizza
slicing
process on "Pizza Fridays". The new pizza slicers are not ordinary $5
pizza
slicers you can buy at the local store. No, those store-bought
ordinary
pizza slicers take too long to slice pizzas and cause the students to
wait
for lunch while the staff slices the pizzas. The school district's new
pizza slicers cost $1,200 each!

And someone said that 12K per student is not enough? LMAO

$12K per student would be plenty, I'm sure, if it were actually spent on
students instead of pizza cutters. I work at a small school--the only
school in the district--with about 250 students. Believe it or not, we
have
a superintendant (because the district will be growing some time in the
next
few years), a principal, a business manager, plus a school secretary, and
a
secretary for the business manager. They all got raises of 14 to 22
percent
last year because they "needed to have salaries comensurate with other
nearby districts." The teachers were told to "not compare their salaries
with nearby districts" because we are a small district. They all got the
newest computers, too, because their 2-year-old models just weren't good
enough any more. This is all on the record! If we could get rid of 1
superfluous administrator and 1 secretary and spend that money on the
students, perhaps we could actually spend it in the classroom where it
would
benefit the students! It's not the money that is at issue. It's how the
money is spent!!

I live in a city that has three separate school districts that combined
would still be smaller than most of the surrounding districts. Every time
there is an attempt to combine the districts, the admin staffs start the
"they will close schools" bs (in reality, two of the three admin staffs
would disappear) enough of the fools fall for it and vote it down.....it is
frustrating.

The voters who oppose the district merger might well be right. There is
a clear and strong correlation between increasing district size and
lower student performance. As education decisions move farther from
parents, student performance falls and per-pupil costs rise.

wrote in message
oups.com...
The voters who oppose the district merger might well be right. There is
a clear and strong correlation between increasing district size and
lower student performance. As education decisions move farther from
parents, student performance falls and per-pupil costs rise.

LMAO, considering the larger surrounding districts all have BETTER
performance than the three.


Oer pupil costs rise......that is another knee slapper.

P Fritz wrote:...
malcolmkirkpatrick wrote:...
P Fritz wrote:...
Subject: See Dick think. He is not like Jane.

The voters who oppose the district merger might well be right. There is
a clear and strong correlation between increasing district size and
lower student performance. As education decisions move farther from
parents, student performance falls and per-pupil costs rise.

LMAO, considering the larger surrounding districts all have BETTER
performance than the three.

Or pupil costs rise......that is another knee slapper.

This argument has two parts:
I. Performance
Take NAEP 4th or 8th grade Reading or Math scores from all
participating US States. Take mean district size (from the __Digest of
Education Statistics__). Take the correlation (score, mean dist.
enrollment), where "score" is mean score, percentile score, or
proficiency score, Reading, Math (composite), Math (Numbers and
Operations), or Math (Algebra and Functions). The correlation is
negative (scoress fall as districts increase in size). Take the percent
of a State's enrollment assigned to districts over 20,000 (or 15,000,
depending on the year of the __Digest...___ you use). The correlation
with "score" (as above) is negative (performance falls as the fraction
of a State's enrollment assigned to large districts increases).

II Cost.
Across the US, the correlation between mean district size and a
State's per pupil budget is positive (costs rise as districts increase
in size). Within States, the correlation (enrollment, $/pupil) is
positive for all but three or four States with five or more districts
over 15,000 (or 20,000, depending on which year of the __Digest...__
you use).

DON'T BELIEVE ME. DO THIS YOURSELF!

http://www.rru.com/~meo/hs.minski.html (One page. Marvin Minsky comment
on school. Please read this.)
http://www.educationevolving.org/pdf/Adolescence.pdf
http://www.educationevolving.org/cle...l=a2&blevel=b1
http://www.schoolchoices.org (Massive site. Useful links).
http://www.worldbank.org/research/jo...97/educate.htm
http://www.ncl.ac.uk/egwest/pdfs/eco...compulsion.pdf
http://harriettubmanagenda.blogspot.com/