View Full Version : No on 103
Don't forget to vote http://i266.photobucket.com/albums/ii269/theogrit/sign%20or%20English%20smilies/2sgn108VOTE.gif
ghettodub
11-01-2011, 09:21
Dropped off my ballot yesterday with a big ol no on 103
KevDen2005
11-01-2011, 09:22
Dropped off my ballot yesterday with a big ol no on 103
Same and same
Rooskibar03
11-01-2011, 10:02
And once again Colorado votes down anything to do that might actually help our schools.
I'm as conservative as anyone here but as a parent in torn on the issue when it comes to school funding. Colorado is always at the bottom of the list when it comes to school funding and I can tell every time I walk into my daughters school.
Dropped off my ballot yesterday with a big ol no on 103
I also. No on everyF**kingthing that involved "give us more money"...I'll continue to vote that way until they show that they can utilize the funds they already have effectively.
Also voted no on extending term limits for the County Attorney. 8 years is enough, now go do something productive.
ghettodub
11-01-2011, 10:07
And once again Colorado votes down anything to do that might actually help our schools.
.I'll continue to vote that way until they show that they can utilize the funds they already have effectively.
^this
Pretty much sums it up for me. I'm all for education, but I don't think throwing more money at a group who clearly doesn't understand how to manage it isn't a solution
And once again Colorado votes down anything to do that might actually help our schools.
I'm as conservative as anyone here but as a parent in torn on the issue when it comes to school funding. Colorado is always at the bottom of the list when it comes to school funding and I can tell every time I walk into my daughters school.
Not to put too fine a point on it, but the school systems waste MILLIONS on mid level, do nothing administrators and other bullsh!t that has NOTHING to do with education. Cut the fat out of the middle, pay the teachers, stop spending money on feel good projects that don't benefit actual teaching. When I went to school in the 70s and 80s, there was money not only for fine arts, sports, and driver's education, but for a whole array of vocational programs as well. Student fees for sports and such were reasonable. Yet, the property taxes we proportionally lower. Why? Because the administrative overhead was about 20% of its current percentage. We had 1 principal, 2 secretaries and 2 assistant principals for a student population of about 1500 students at my high school. The 2 assistant principals also taught 3 classes each per day. The same school now has ann enrollment of just over 900 students, a principal, 3 vice principals, 5 assistant vice principals (none of whom teach), and about a dozen office staff.
Zundfolge
11-01-2011, 10:23
And once again Colorado votes down anything to do that might actually help our schools.
I'm as conservative as anyone here but as a parent in torn on the issue when it comes to school funding. Colorado is always at the bottom of the list when it comes to school funding and I can tell every time I walk into my daughters school.
Don't fall for the lie that more money equals better schools.
http://broken-government.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/Cato-chart-1.jpg
If 103 passes it will only kill jobs (which won't help the children of the newly unemployed get a better education) and empower the Unions and Democrat Party (yes, I'm being redundant there)
jerrymrc
11-01-2011, 10:29
They also add that line, "and for other uses" Everytime we give them more $$ it finds a black hole never to be seen again. [Rant1]
I currently view public schools as poorly managed daycares. I do not expect any child to come out of any of them with anything resembling an education. Dumping money on the problem does nothing because lack of funding is not the problem, it is a problem rooted deep in this touchy feeley everyone gets a ribbon teach to the lowest common denominator society that has developed as a result of liberals taking control of our school system.
I honestly believe that creating a conservatively ran education system that encouraged competitive education standards through pay by performance would completely fix this country in about 20 years. You would kill the liberal set of retard ideals at the source instead of fighting with idiots who cant shut thier mouth long enough to form a complete thought. Just my 2 cents. No on 103.
Zundfolge
11-01-2011, 10:43
Also note that Colorado Schools already rank decently high (17th in the nation according to this group (http://www.alec.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Report_Card_on_American_Educa tion)) and yet we don't spend as much per pupil as many other states that are doing much worse. See this chart (http://winginstitute.org/uploadedImages/Graphs/Systems/NAEP%20scores%20vs%20spending%20by%20state%20whtba ck.jpg)(it's real big or I'd have IMG tagged it).
At any rate, a "temporary tax" is like "temporary herpes".
OneGuy67
11-01-2011, 10:46
I voted no on this, but truthfully, was torn. Working in government right now, I know how tight our budget is, how much additional work I've been given, how much prioritizing has been done, how much our pay cuts and furloughs have been and cost me, how much health insurance has gone up. My take home paycheck is substantially less now than it was 5 years ago and consumer prices have gone up dramatically in that time.
I voted my pocketbook, knowing I can't afford to pay more because I don't have the money.
It is too easy to say cut the fat, but from the outside looking in, I don't know what the fat is that needs to be cut. Too much generalization. I know there are some teachers here on the forum and I would really like to hear from them about their schools, their budgets, their administration and their ideas about where their structure could be manipulated to meet the current budget.
They also add that line, "and for other uses" Everytime we give them more $$ it finds a black hole never to be seen again. [Rant1]
that line is why I voted no. Annoys me almost as much as auto shop receipts that say "extra fee for profit". Don't blatantly tell Mr you're ripping me off!
Bring back dodgeball and many of our educational system woes would "go way."
Inconel710
11-01-2011, 11:13
My wife and I voted no as well. We were torn, but our son is in a charter school. We pay $200 a year for the extra field trips and put in time volunteering at the school . I'd rather see the school raise its fees than raise taxes - I trust the school to spend $ wisely. I don't trust Denver!
jackthewall81
11-01-2011, 11:22
School money goes away, teachers are paid less, good teachers leave for private schools or higher paying schools, and then because of the no child left behind act where schools get money based on test scores, the teachers teach for the test and omit the supplemental forms of education such as music, science, and the social arts. My mother retired from Douglas County School district after teaching for 30 years because people vote no on these kinds of bills just to save money from their own pockets. She lost her BRT job and was forced into early retirement. She basically acted as the assistant principal as well as helping special needs children read, she mentored teachers on teaching methods, would substitute for no extra money if a teacher called in sick, and taught night classes for teachers trying to expand their syllabuses. Now they have no one to do these jobs because people are voting away money from the school districts. Douglas County was one of the best school districts 4 years ago with some of the highest scores in the states, and with no money the superintendent left 2 years ago. They hired a new one for less pay and the schools are on there way to DPS or APS levels, which are at the bottom of the state in terms of scores.
Then white affluent parents move out of the district because of the decline in adequate education opportunities for their children, once they all move out who moves in?
I believe that public schools should go extinct and that private schools should take over, just because I am a believer in Bureaucracy. But the foundation to this nation is education. And that education is primarily public education as of right now. Take the money away from that and give it to other useless government programs, then we have nothing left. Technology advancements will be outsourced to other countries who qualify more engineers, scientists, and program developers. We will have a country full of arts degrees, and students who cannot get into colleges and a huge need for specialized services (we already are in need for them). Yes there are tons of problems with the public school systems, but it is the foundation of our country and it needs much more funding to keep this country where we want it to be, on top of the world. To be on top, we need to have the most educated and most well rounded children in the world and cutting public funding narrows the public education that our students can get. Killing our country from within.
My .02 just because my mother was a teacher, and forced into retirement because of selfish voters.
Zundfolge
11-01-2011, 11:33
If we could just get 3 concepts cemented in the minds of most Americans I think we'd be better off.
1) Economics is not a zero sum game.
2) Correlation does not equal cause.
3) A right cannot exist where it creates an obligation to another.
#2 is the applicable one here ...
Yes there are tons of problems with the public school systems, but it is the foundation of our country and it needs much more funding to keep this country where we want it to be, on top of the world. To be on top, we need to have the most educated and most well rounded children in the world and cutting public funding narrows the public education that our students can get. Killing our country from within.
Spending money on education DOES NOT equal better education. It just means at best we have a well funded bureaucracy ... at worse we have a giant black hole we keep trying to fill with money. In the case of public education we have a well funded bureaucracy and a well funded union machine that keeps Democrats in office (so they can continue to get more money from the people for the black hole).
my mother was a teacher, and forced into retirement because of selfish voters.
And I won't be able to retire at 65 because of selfish government bureaucrats (including teachers) that continue to steal half of what I make every year.
Lex_Luthor
11-01-2011, 11:43
My fiance works in Special Education. She says that their budget is supposedly separate from the rest of the school's funding, but somehow the director manages to squander it. But somehow manages to live a lavish lesbian lifestyle, flying her daughter all over the world for ice skating. I think I last heard that she was selected to be audited. I hope they catch something.
They've been cut of the "teacher work days" which amounted to something like 17 less days in the year that they'll be paid for. Some of the para's weren't allowed to go in for CPR, First Aid, and Crisis Control training because they still had a couple months left in the previous year's certification. So apparently it's ok to let the training lapse while still requiring the para's and teachers to fulfull their duties even though no longer qualified. It'll probably be next year before they can go back for the training they need.
She speaks Spanish, and is "asked" to translate at parent-teacher conferences for other teachers/kids, instead of operating her own conferences. My mom is a qualified Spanish translator, and had worked for this same district for close to 10 years as a Para. Now they won't return her calls to become an official translator for these exact situations, because they would rather have someone who isn't appropriately qualified - who is on the clock already - perform duties that aren't included in what they should be doing. My fiance refuses left and right to translate, saying that she has her own job to do, and tells them to hire someone properly qualified, and if they need a reference, she knows someone who is perfect for the job.
jackthewall81
11-01-2011, 11:50
Look at the higher test scores in the state, then look at the amount of money that those counties have. Looks like higher test scores directly correlate to money.
Funny because my was a teacher and my dad is a engineer who works for a goverment contractor. He cannot retire at 65 because of the same problems.
What will help education systems improve in your opinion zundfolge?
Zundfolge
11-01-2011, 12:09
Look at the higher test scores in the state, then look at the amount of money that those counties have. Looks like higher test scores directly correlate to money.
Sources please? Because I already posted a chart (http://winginstitute.org/uploadedImages/Graphs/Systems/NAEP%20scores%20vs%20spending%20by%20state%20whtba ck.jpg) that shows several states that spend significantly more than Colorado per-student that have LOWER test scores (along with a few that spend less and score higher).
What will help education systems improve in your opinion zundfolge?
Privatize and de-unionize the system.
In 1837 the compulsory government/union monopoly of education began with the institution of a system built on the Prussian model (http://www.fff.org/freedom/0795n.asp), who's original intent was to create better citizen-soldiers that no longer thought for themselves. I fail to see how this is a good thing.
Get government out of it and allow parents to choose how their children are educated and more important, how much they're willing to pay. The ensuing competition will elevate the education of our children far beyond what it is today and it will cost less. Adam Smith's "Invisible Hand" works.
Aloha_Shooter
11-01-2011, 12:16
And once again Colorado votes down anything to do that might actually help our schools.
I'm as conservative as anyone here but as a parent in torn on the issue when it comes to school funding. Colorado is always at the bottom of the list when it comes to school funding and I can tell every time I walk into my daughters school.
The problem isn't the funding, it's the attitude and system. I was just listening to an audio book of Heinlein's "Have Space Suit -- Will Travel" and his description of the inadequacies of the educational system of the 1950s is priceless -- you could multiply all his complaints tenfold today and NONE of them have anything to do with funding.
The problems with education today are society's values and emphasis on "soft" curricula and touchy-feely garbage instead of actually expecting students to learn something, particularly critical thinking skills, or demonstrate any initiative or responsibility toward their own learning. More computers actually make the problem worse (and I'm a technogeek both by education and avocation) when students think the answer to any question is "look it up in Wikipedia" or "Google it."
Read William McGurn's column in the WSJ -- he's talking about college but his argument could just as well be applied to pre-collegiate education.
Been on my soapbox before on this issue. Y'all know where I stand. I love teaching and I love music. Better yet, I love being able to teach music!! Your kids will get an education with me "whether or not you want to" because that is my job. I can do my job with a paycheck of $1mil or a paycheck of $18K a year. Granted, the $1mil would be nice and I would be able to afford new instruments and music for everyone in the school, but... it's not needed.
As a teacher in a low socio-econimic school that has minimum funding (even by CO standards), I know beyond a shadow of a doubt, that it is the quality of teachers and not how much money you throw at a problem...
In music, we have to learn critical thinking skills, reasoning, logical sequenceing, teamwork, discipline, math, science, reading (English and Foreign languages), et al... but for some reason, music is the first thing to be cut. If you get a chance, look up Chris Potter and how she turned her music program around with private marketing, etc. Amazing.
Thanks for listening.
The public education problem can be simply summed up this way.
It is an institution whose sole purpose is to make sure its charges leave that institution knowing what to think rather than how to think.
Twain said it best about newspapers but it is equally applicable to public schools. "If you don't attend you will be uninformed. If you do attend you will be misinformed."
OneGuy67
11-01-2011, 12:59
Privatize and de-unionize the system.
Get government out of it and allow parents to choose how their children are educated and more important, how much they're willing to pay. The ensuing competition will elevate the education of our children far beyond what it is today and it will cost less. Adam Smith's "Invisible Hand" works.
I can't disagree with this notion, however, most people can't pay, which is one of the reasons why many attend public schools as their parents can't afford a charter or private school. This then gets into the question of giving public money to people to spend, which then gets us back into the government controlling the dollars (collection and dissemination) and then comptrolling it.
Parents should be able to choose for their kids and parents should be able to pay their own way. However, that isn't reality.
when the state (county and city too) can show me that they are effectively using my $6500 a year in property taxes, and my 8.25% on everything I purchase...my .125% road use tax, my 4.63% in state income tax, .....etc, etc, etc, I'll gladly give more to education.
I have 2 daughters in elementary school. And want what's best for them, but if we continue to "feed the beast" it'll only get worse.
My family and I live within our means (as I'm sure many here do as well) it's time our government starts to do the same. I'm making $40,000 less now than I did in 2008, but my taxes and costs keep going up....They keep taking a bigger piece of the pie
Zundfolge
11-01-2011, 13:10
I can't disagree with this notion, however, most people can't pay, which is one of the reasons why many attend public schools as their parents can't afford a charter or private school. This then gets into the question of giving public money to people to spend, which then gets us back into the government controlling the dollars (collection and dissemination) and then comptrolling it.
Parents should be able to choose for their kids and parents should be able to pay their own way. However, that isn't reality.
I dunno ... I grew up with a little Catholic school about 4 blocks from my house ... most of the kids I knew that went there were po (too poor for the second 'o' and the 'r') There's no way some of those kids parents were paying for their schooling (well other than the money extorted from them to pay for the public schools they weren't using).
Where there's a will there's a way and the American people are the most charitable in human history.
I think we've all been conditioned to think there are some things that only government can do. We've only had compulsory public education for 174 years, and somehow things like The Renaissance, The Enlightenment and the birth of our own great nation happened without it.
I don't have all the answers but there has to be a better way than just blindly throwing money down a government run black hole.
jackthewall81
11-01-2011, 13:56
Sources please? Because I already posted a chart (http://winginstitute.org/uploadedImages/Graphs/Systems/NAEP%20scores%20vs%20spending%20by%20state%20whtba ck.jpg) that shows several states that spend significantly more than Colorado per-student that have LOWER test scores (along with a few that spend less and score higher).
Privatize and de-unionize the system.
In 1837 the compulsory government/union monopoly of education began with the institution of a system built on the Prussian model (http://www.fff.org/freedom/0795n.asp), who's original intent was to create better citizen-soldiers that no longer thought for themselves. I fail to see how this is a good thing.
Get government out of it and allow parents to choose how their children are educated and more important, how much they're willing to pay. The ensuing competition will elevate the education of our children far beyond what it is today and it will cost less. Adam Smith's "Invisible Hand" works.
A few states doesn't represent all of them and I am talking specifically about Colorado. Ill get some for ya, my mother will gladly email me some.
I agree. Everything needs to be privatized, but it wont happen for a while.
Zundfolge
11-01-2011, 13:58
I agree. Everything needs to be privatized, but it wont happen for a while.
No, you're probably right. That's why vouchers are probably the best realistic idea out there.
voted no! public schools are a joke and should be done away with.
jackthewall81
11-01-2011, 14:05
I can't disagree with this notion, however, most people can't pay, which is one of the reasons why many attend public schools as their parents can't afford a charter or private school. This then gets into the question of giving public money to people to spend, which then gets us back into the government controlling the dollars (collection and dissemination) and then comptrolling it.
Parents should be able to choose for their kids and parents should be able to pay their own way. However, that isn't reality.
i see privatization of all education as a initiative. If all schooling is privatized it will create a system where education is the single most important thing to succeed within American society . Drop outs will decrease, the so called racialized groups will emerge from poverty, IF their children know that the only way to succeed is to get an education, and the only way to get an education is to PAY for it like everything else in America since we are bureaucratic nation. We are not socialist (at least not yet) and private education would help because parents would work knowing that they have to pay for school the whole way until high school graduation. Dropouts would be the burger flippers of the world, but there would be less of them because they grow up knowing that schooling is something that is not just handed to them.
Byte Stryke
11-01-2011, 14:09
I too tire of the pandering to human greed to solve our problems.
We aren't going to fix our schools by simply throwing more money at it.
We require deep political and social changes to initiate those changes in our schools.
we need to rid ourselves of the entitlements, the nanny-state and the daycare mentality before anything will change.
The teacher's wage is NOT the problem... the problem is the fat at the top sucking the school funding dry. School administrators do not need to make as much as a Senator.
It is not the teachers job to raise our kids... Their job is to educate.
Get government out of my disciplinary decisions... if my kid steps out of line, it is my responsibility to knock him back in. My Father did it, His father before him, as well as his before him... worked well so far.
more money will not fix any of this.
OneGuy67
11-01-2011, 14:16
when the state (county and city too) can show me that they are effectively using my $6500 a year in property taxes, and my 8.25% on everything I purchase...my .125% road use tax, my 4.63% in state income tax, .....etc, etc, etc, I'll gladly give more to education.
You pay $6,500 in property taxes!! Holy cow!
No, you're probably right. That's why vouchers are probably the best realistic idea out there.
I disagree on this solely on the issue of public money being given to private institutions. You want your kid to go to Catholic school? No problem. You will need to pay for it though, out of your own money. Same for any secular school. You want your kid to go to Cherry Creek High School? No problem. You figure out how to get him/her there and they are golden. Open enrollment.
jackthewall81
11-01-2011, 14:18
I too tire of the pandering to human greed to solve our problems.
We aren't going to fix our schools by simply throwing more money at it.
We require deep political and social changes to initiate those changes in our schools.
we need to rid ourselves of the entitlements, the nanny-state and the daycare mentality before anything will change.
The teacher's wage is NOT the problem... the problem is the fat at the top sucking the school funding dry. School administrators do not need to make as much as a Senator.
It is not the teachers job to raise our kids... Their job is to educate.
Get government out of my disciplinary decisions... if my kid steps out of line, it is my responsibility to knock him back in. My Father did it, His father before him, as well as his before him... worked well so far.
more money will not fix any of this.
Nothing will fix this.
We are screwed and will need some tremendous social overhauling before we will be able to have children who are not sissys because the government says that physical punishment is bad. And that no child should be left behind bs perpetuates it. The strong survive and the weak die. That is how we need to think as a nation.
The only thing that will change this is when America is on the brink of complete collapse, then peoples rationality and will to survive will remind them that the strong survive and the weak die. No more settling for being okay at something, but everyone will strive to be the best and vote in a government with the same ideals.
jhood001
11-01-2011, 14:21
I currently don't have any children, but I probably will at some point and the private vs. public debate will gradually gain more interest for me.
For now, however, my question is this:
Advocates for the privatization of education seem to think that doing so will increase efficiency and as a result, drive down costs. However, we are seeing the exact opposite in the cost of private college education. Would the trend we have seen over the last decade+ in the private college sector not be applicable to primary education? And if not... why not?
And would education still be mandatory up to the age of 17 (or whatever it is now) under a privatized system? And if it was, wouldn't there be even more incentive for private school systems to charge more? Things that you are required to have for one reason or another generally cost alot more than the optional ones.
I grabbed a quick graph, but I can't attest to its accuracy or validity.
http://financemymoney.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/college-tuition.jpg
jhood001
11-01-2011, 14:35
we need to rid ourselves of the entitlements, the nanny-state and the daycare mentality before anything will change.
The teacher's wage is NOT the problem... the problem is the fat at the top sucking the school funding dry. School administrators do not need to make as much as a Senator.
It is not the teachers job to raise our kids... Their job is to educate.
Get government out of my disciplinary decisions... if my kid steps out of line, it is my responsibility to knock him back in. My Father did it, His father before him, as well as his before him... worked well so far.
more money will not fix any of this.
Yes, yes and yes.
In regards to your 'fat at the top' statement, consider this -
The Superintendent for Adams 12 is a lawyer. Yes, a lawyer. He has zero education in the realm of education (excluding education law). His cost to the district comes at a premium because he is a lawyer and further, his primary focus on affairs within his district is avoiding lawsuits. Arguably, doing so will help save money. The downside is that avoiding lawsuits inevitably leads to the further mamby-pamby-ization of our schools.
For example:
My brother is an educator in grades 1-5. When a student becomes disruptive (in many cases downright violent) within his classroom, he can order a 'time-out'. However, if the student refuses, he can do nothing to enforce it.
He can order the student to the principal's office, but he cannot physically make them go. He can then request the principal to his classroom... who can also not physically force the student to go. Their last resort tactic if the student continues to be disruptive is to.... get this... shut off the lights in the room and remove all of the other students!
What does this teach the disruptive student as well as all of the others within the classroom? The squeaky wheel gets the grease.... and has all of the power.
Bad stuff.
I disagree on this solely on the issue of public money being given to private institutions. You want your kid to go to Catholic school? No problem. You will need to pay for it though, out of your own money. Same for any secular school. You want your kid to go to Cherry Creek High School? No problem. You figure out how to get him/her there and they are golden. Open enrollment.
Would the parents of parochial school students get a break on their property taxes, or would they pay for their kid's education along with supporting a public school system? Would the county have to transfer a portion of their tax revenue to a school where a student transfers, or would the "magnet school" have to bear the cost out of their existing budget?
Mobat555
11-01-2011, 15:04
The problem isn't the funding, it's the attitude and system.
Spending money on education DOES NOT equal better education.
As a teacher in a low socio-econimic school that has minimum funding (even by CO standards), I know beyond a shadow of a doubt, that it is the quality of teachers and not how much money you throw at a problem...
This in my opinion relates to what I think happened with scientists. They pay ridiculously less then wall-street and tech industry. So our highly intelligent people put two and two together and got educated in something else. Less and less you pay teachers the less quality of teachers you get. Because not everyone is like BigBear who is willing to do it for humanity's sake rather then monetary gain. Lower the pay the less educated and capable people will be filling the positions.
For now, however, my question is this:
Advocates for the privatization of education seem to think that doing so will increase efficiency and as a result, drive down costs. However, we are seeing the exact opposite in the cost of private college education. Would the trend we have seen over the last decade+ in the private college sector not be applicable to primary education? And if not... why not?
The reason (I think) that the cost of secondary education has increased so dramatically is for a couple reasons
1. the government now guarantees student loans. There is no risk involved for the college/university. They'll get their money so they can charge whatever they want
and
2. basic supply and demand. Years ago, only the brightest or those with certain career plans went to college. Now I would guess that number is (I would guess) closer to 80% of those that graduate high school. The "better schools" can charge more because of the exclusivity of going there.
so you get a combination of "Little Johnny" needing to go to a better school and there being no risk in the school getting paid...they can charge whatever they want
And once again Colorado votes down anything to do that might actually help our schools.
I'm as conservative as anyone here but as a parent in torn on the issue when it comes to school funding. Colorado is always at the bottom of the list when it comes to school funding and I can tell every time I walk into my daughters school.
My wife is a teacher and I voted no on this. too many loopholes for them to spend this money elsewhere. I don't trust the state when they want to give free schooling to illegals. Once that legislation is in place that keeps these kids from getting free and reduced school lunch, getting special teachers to teach them english, and no cost bus rides, then I will vote yes to give more money to school based on my state taxes.
The kids of true citizens of our state should receive the extra help, the extra care and their class sizes should be reduced. Paying another teacher to teach kids english is taking away from those kids whose parents/family/friends are covering the costs of public schooling.
I voted yes for our local mill levy because it will directly affect the schools. It would add I think about $75 a year to my property taxes.
Don't fall for the lie that more money equals better schools.
http://broken-government.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/Cato-chart-1.jpg
If 103 passes it will only kill jobs (which won't help the children of the newly unemployed get a better education) and empower the Unions and Democrat Party (yes, I'm being redundant there)
this graph looks amazingly just like the federal bailout obama said would save us....keep throwing money at it, yet nothing changes.
I do know locally that at my wifes school some jobs were cut, but they were teacher jobs. class sizes now are upwards of 45:1 student:teacher ratio. that is insane and you can't expect any of those kids to get a lot of of their schooling. The teachers are sucking it up, doing what it takes, got their planning time cut in half, have kids in for lunch, for their plan periods, after school etc. etc....all for a pay freeze or to not receive their pay increase when they become more qualified (such as a masters degree). My sister has not receive her masters pay for 3 years now...that is over $20,000 total.
I agree with what has been said that admins need to be cut or they need to be in the classroom to cut down class sizes. At my high school, graduated in 2003, we had a principal, 3 vice principals, 5 deans (basically assistant vice principals), and at least 8 front desk staff/secretaries. I think we had 1800 students. that is ridiculous.
jhood001
11-01-2011, 15:36
The reason (I think) that the cost of secondary education has increased so dramatically is for a couple reasons
1. the government now guarantees student loans. There is no risk involved for the college/university. They'll get their money so they can charge whatever they want
and
2. basic supply and demand. Years ago, only the brightest or those with certain career plans went to college. Now I would guess that number is (I would guess) closer to 80% of those that graduate high school. The "better schools" can charge more because of the exclusivity of going there.
so you get a combination of "Little Johnny" needing to go to a better school and there being no risk in the school getting paid...they can charge whatever they want
I think there is something to be said for #2.
However, won't privatizing primary school have the exact same effect? Nevermind our new 80%. We'll then have 100% if primary school is still mandatory. Which I hope it will be - Unless we want the majority of our children to be day laborers.
I'm not sure #1 holds water. I fail to see how a guarantee on a loan has anything to do with the ability to raise the price of the service. Because it is guaranteed? Someone still has to take on that loan and what they will or will not agree to pay is on them regardless of whether it is backed or not.
Aloha_Shooter
11-01-2011, 15:48
I disagree on this solely on the issue of public money being given to private institutions. You want your kid to go to Catholic school? No problem. You will need to pay for it though, out of your own money. Same for any secular school. You want your kid to go to Cherry Creek High School? No problem. You figure out how to get him/her there and they are golden. Open enrollment.
Your argument parallels Obama's thinking in that it assumes "public" money belongs to the State. So-called "public" money is taxpayer money, citizens' money, so it IS his money and already pays for school. He pays taxes that are intended to be used to educate his kid. The money apportioned by the state should follow the kid -- that's all the voucher system is doing really (and in actuality, only a PORTION of the money apportioned to educate that kid follows him/her as a portion is kept back to pay for the bloated state/county infrastructure).
I grabbed a quick graph, but I can't attest to its accuracy or validity.
Your graph is consistent with the figure William McGurn cited in his editorial in the WSJ.
The state(s) got involved in education decades upon decades ago to bring all schools up to minimum standards and maintain or improve those standards. Today, public education does nothing of the sort and one could argue the political forces of Public Education are a pedagogy dragging students down to sub-minimum standards.
OneGuy67
11-01-2011, 15:49
Would the parents of parochial school students get a break on their property taxes, or would they pay for their kid's education along with supporting a public school system? Would the county have to transfer a portion of their tax revenue to a school where a student transfers, or would the "magnet school" have to bear the cost out of their existing budget?
Interesting question! It is one I thought about. At first blush, I would agree that the property tax mil levy the HOMEOWNER would normally pay to the school district should go to whatever school the kid ultimately went to, be it private or public. However, the funds collected through other taxing sources that end up in the general fund that is divvied up to the schools each year for each student should not follow the kid to a private school. Of course, this penalizes families who don't own property.
I think your second question deals with a recent story in which internet schools would get the initial check for the student, only to have the student drop out and begin attending the brick and mortar school down the street, without that school getting the public funding and I agree that the prorated funding should be rebated back to the state and reallocated to where the student went. Same for any drop out student. The funding for that student should be given back to the state. Right now, there is a certain date in the school calendar that they finalize their attendance and receive a per pupil chunk of money from the state. After that date, the school could care less if the student attends anymore as they got their money. Maybe have the state pay monthly instead of annually?
I don't know. I certainly don't have the answers.
I voted no on this, but truthfully, was torn. Working in government right now, I know how tight our budget is, how much additional work I've been given, how much prioritizing has been done, how much our pay cuts and furloughs have been and cost me, how much health insurance has gone up. My take home paycheck is substantially less now than it was 5 years ago and consumer prices have gone up dramatically in that time.
I voted my pocketbook, knowing I can't afford to pay more because I don't have the money.
It is too easy to say cut the fat, but from the outside looking in, I don't know what the fat is that needs to be cut. Too much generalization. I know there are some teachers here on the forum and I would really like to hear from them about their schools, their budgets, their administration and their ideas about where their structure could be manipulated to meet the current budget.
My wifes school has cut pretty much everything they can at this point. 1 principal and 1 vice principal. they have 580 kids.
there are I think 25 teachers now. 7 periods a day. pretty much all teachers have only 1 plan period where they don't have kids).
2 gym teachers, a music teacher are included in that.
they have a counselor on staff, I think 3 front desk/secretary staff, might be 4.
I don't know what their budget is at, but I know they are tight, the class sizes for my wife range from 35-40 or so. I think she sees 180 kids a day, maybe a bit more.
Then there are Para-professionals. while they do serve a purpose, sometimes there is 1 adult following 1 kid around a day. that is what KILLS a budget. I would say there are 3-5 paras at the school. their pay sucks, but add in health benefits etc and it is adding up big time. so say 4 of them, the cost is probably 200K. that should be cut in half at least if not more. put all the kids who can't function on their own in a normal classroom and put them into a special room where 1-2 teachers can help them learn at their own pace.
Those kids not only slow the class down, they also disrupt the class a lot slowing it down even further. then if a para doesn't show, or if they have to leave half way through class...which a lot of times is scheduled, it leaves the teacher with the special needs student as well as the regular students.
It is the fault of the system. the system needs to be changed.
The kids who ride busses are paying for those bus rides now (expect for those who get it free...usually along with lunch and sports participation etc.)
Gym needs to stick around. a gym can hold 80-100 kids and participation can be achieved by all with 2 gym teachers, but the classroom sizes need to be reeled in to more manageable levels for students to learn better and get more one on one help with their teacher.
The good teachers (for the most part) are being retained, the bad ones are getting weeded out to a degree (tenure changes last year now allow administrators the ability to get rid of bad teachers even if they have tenure). The teachers are going to give it everything they can, if they don't, the principal sees it. At her school, her principal is awesome and really does a good job keeping on top of everything. He really does earn his paycheck.
Been on my soapbox before on this issue. Y'all know where I stand. I love teaching and I love music. Better yet, I love being able to teach music!! Your kids will get an education with me "whether or not you want to" because that is my job. I can do my job with a paycheck of $1mil or a paycheck of $18K a year. Granted, the $1mil would be nice and I would be able to afford new instruments and music for everyone in the school, but... it's not needed.
As a teacher in a low socio-econimic school that has minimum funding (even by CO standards), I know beyond a shadow of a doubt, that it is the quality of teachers and not how much money you throw at a problem...
In music, we have to learn critical thinking skills, reasoning, logical sequenceing, teamwork, discipline, math, science, reading (English and Foreign languages), et al... but for some reason, music is the first thing to be cut. If you get a chance, look up Chris Potter and how she turned her music program around with private marketing, etc. Amazing.
Thanks for listening.
and this is what you are going to see out of 95% of the teachers out there. It isn't the teachers, they are still doing their best, even with crappy class sizes, even with pay freezes, sub-par equipment, and even covering supplies out of their own pockets (without re-reimbursement).
OneGuy67
11-01-2011, 16:00
Your argument parallels Obama's thinking in that it assumes "public" money belongs to the State. So-called "public" money is taxpayer money, citizens' money, so it IS his money and already pays for school. He pays taxes that are intended to be used to educate his kid. The money apportioned by the state should follow the kid -- that's all the voucher system is doing really (and in actuality, only a PORTION of the money apportioned to educate that kid follows him/her as a portion is kept back to pay for the bloated state/county infrastructure).
While I wouldn't equate my argument to Obama, I understand what you are saying, but just don't agree with it. It is tax-payer money, but to each individual, that amount is small. It is the combined amount that creates the pot to which money is divvied up in. The money apportioned by the state for each kid isn't all paid for by that kid's parents. The amount they contribute is pretty small overall. You want the rest of the people's money to pay for that kid, which is my issue.
OneGuy67
11-01-2011, 16:02
Sniper, my sincerest appreciation goes out to your wife and her coworkers. It is a job I could never do, nor would I want to. It's an old saying, but teachers should be paid what the professional sports people are paid and vise versa.
Aloha_Shooter
11-01-2011, 16:03
covering supplies out of their own pockets (without re-reimbursement).
This is one thing that chaps my arse. I would love to see a private non-profit devoted to finding these cases and fixing them. I KNOW some families or districts can't afford proper supplies -- I'd be happy to donate supplies or funds to get the students going in the right direction, I just don't want my pocket picked by Denver or the county to do what THEY think they want to do (which is probably funding more "education" in "diversity" and "sensitivity").
Dont see how funneling more money to the state will fix anything. My family, including an out of work Teacher all voted no. When ever the state blows the budget they cut Teachers, Fire fighters, Police ... and wail to high heavens for more money. Oddly, local school still have an abundance of Administrators and I haven't heard anything about cutting their positions or salaries. Only seem to make cuts in the classroom.
Raising taxes will definitely hurt the economy and I doubt it would do a bit of good for the schools. Call me cynical but not thanks!
Same and same
ditto here.
it's going to be a painful detox, but we need to force govt. off its drug of choice. (our money)
joet is right about tuition. if the govt was a private company, it would be broken up by the government. they have completely monopolized school loans, and the cost is a killer.
and worse than that, these "college educated" people are stupid enough to believe that "rich people" are at fault.
the govt spending jungle needs some slashing and burning.
Sniper, my sincerest appreciation goes out to your wife and her coworkers. It is a job I could never do, nor would I want to. It's an old saying, but teachers should be paid what the professional sports people are paid and vise versa.
I will definitely let her know. They are most definitely one of the most under appreciated employees out there. whether you like public school or not most of them try hard to do their job well, teach ALL the kids, put up with the bad ones, push the great ones and keep the parents involved.
This is one thing that chaps my arse. I would love to see a private non-profit devoted to finding these cases and fixing them. I KNOW some families or districts can't afford proper supplies -- I'd be happy to donate supplies or funds to get the students going in the right direction, I just don't want my pocket picked by Denver or the county to do what THEY think they want to do (which is probably funding more "education" in "diversity" and "sensitivity").
best thing you can do is be patient and answer your door when the bell rings. Students who do fundraising are where the biggest impact will occur and you can be certain almost all your money will directly impact that kid, and most of the time you will get something back out of it....even if it is an overpriced tub of cookie dough[Tooth]
KevDen2005
11-01-2011, 16:46
And once again Colorado votes down anything to do that might actually help our schools.
I'm as conservative as anyone here but as a parent in torn on the issue when it comes to school funding. Colorado is always at the bottom of the list when it comes to school funding and I can tell every time I walk into my daughters school.
I don't mean to be that guy certainly vote how you feel is right. But I took a government budgeting course very recently that opened my eyes a ton. Colorado has legislation that mandates that certain percentages of nearly all taxes go to education and as of last year that was around 40 percent of the state tax burden.
I have numerous friends in the teaching field that tell me time and time again how misappropriated the funds are. I love education however, like everything I refuse to give them money if they can't use it a little wiser. I also say don't believe that bumper sticker that says Colorado is 49th in funding schools. We give lots and lots of money with federal assistance. This is also why the state cuts funding to other programs because there isn't legislation to maintain those programs like education in Colorado, however there is no real way to save money unless you plan on cutting health care.
Again, not trying to start a fight, just stating my stance and why I think schools are ridiculous to ask for more when they can't control what they have.
or we could just fix the budget problem by not paying for illegals to go to school here...
It seems as though most of the budget problem in our country can be solved by deporting illegals and not letting them back in.
jackthewall81
11-01-2011, 17:22
or we could just fix the budget problem by not paying for illegals to go to school here...
It seems as though most of the budget problem in our country can be solved by deporting illegals and not letting them back in.
There goes our infastructure.
its currently going down in flames 72% no
28% yes
its currently going down in flames 72% no
28% yes
GOOD
You gotta be kidding me.
I just checked the Denver Post at it is at 64.8% NO out of 48% reporting.
Well alright, I hope it fails, currently showing that 35% of the voters are idiots.
I fail to see what makes schools special. the economy shrank by 5% a couple years back, we Maybe have recovered to where we were then (maybe). Everything is getting cut, what makes schools special?
Hell, look what has happened to the private sector over the last few years.
I fail to see what makes schools special. the economy shrank by 5% a couple years back, we Maybe have recovered to where we were then (maybe). Everything is getting cut, what makes schools special?
Hell, look what has happened to the private sector over the last few years.
I agree, nothing special about public schools. Education shouldn't be publicly funded in the first place. Schools should get the parents money because the school earned it.
This money is a payoff to the union for getting the Looper his governorship.
61% OF PRECINCTS REPORTING No 435,344 65% Yes 232,294 35%
I fail to see what makes schools special. the economy shrank by 5% a couple years back, we Maybe have recovered to where we were then (maybe). Everything is getting cut, what makes schools special?
Hell, look what has happened to the private sector over the last few years.
remember that it is "for the children"[Swim]
remember that it is "for the children"[Swim]
[ROFL1][ROFL2][ROFL3][LOL]Good one[Coffee]
Here are a few facts. Teachers' pay and benefits are inversely proportional to the kids scholastic achievement scores. Back when America's education was was the envy of the world, teachers got paid peanuts. Now the education system is making bank and the kids are failing.
Why the change?? America haters and leftists took over the profession. The leftists realized after WWII that no army could conquer this country from without. It had to be conquered from within. A nation of thinkers cannot be subjugated, but a nation of morons sure as hell can.
(“America will fall without a shot being fired. It will fall from within.” – Nikita Krushchev)
The teachers are not totally to blame anymore than the average German soldier was to blame for Hitler's policies. However neither are completely innocent.
We often hear the lament that peace loving muslims never speak out or rebel against the jihadist faction of their religion. And so I say, "Why don't the few normal thinking people in the education profession start a revolution of their own?". You know they would have the support of the public. But they won't will they, because that would require walking the walk and it is easier to kowtow to the leftist establishment, pay them unions and phuck kids heads up with the progressive bull$hit and collect a paycheck and tell everyone outside of that world how appalled they are by what they see. I have no doubt Hans and Klaus used to go home in the evenings after a long day at the concentration camps and complain to their wives about what they were being forced to do. Although for them failure to carry out orders usually meant a meeting with a barking Mauser.
The system needs to be rebuilt from the ground up. The only way is to start from the beginning aka kindergarten. Build it one year at a time so the kids who are in it only know the new world. The Terra Nova of education. And when the last of the students of the old system graduate (oxymoron)
fire every last one of those sorry arsed bastards associated with it and ban them from any form of education with the threat of prosecution if they are caught near a school.
Richard K
11-01-2011, 23:44
And once again Colorado votes down anything to do that might actually help our schools.
I'm as conservative as anyone here but as a parent in torn on the issue when it comes to school funding. Colorado is always at the bottom of the list when it comes to school funding and I can tell every time I walk into my daughters school.
Are you forgetting the ballot issue that was passed several years ago that automatically increases school funding by 5% each year regardless of the inflation rate. Or, a bond issue that was passed in Jefferson County that was supposed to go for much needed new schools and smaller class size that was instead used for teacher salaries?
This tax increase is supposed to expire in 5 years. Have you ever seen a tax increase expire? We are still paying a "temorary" gas tax which was levied for the building of the Valley Highway (I-25) through Denver after the flood in the sixties. I pay over $300 per month in property taxes with the single most bite of it going to schools. When is enough a enough?
as someone who has half their family and friends in education, i can comfortably say anyone who still buys the line that our schools need more money hasn't been learning their lessons over the last few decades. MONEY IS NOT THE PROBLEM! in fact, money might be the problem in the opposite direction. schools blow money like no one's business and we spend way more on our schooling than any other country yet our scores are lower. and we increase our spending every year and what happens to the scores? oh yeah, they go down. the education system won't be fixed until the libtards stop holding everyone's hands and start treating kids in a way that requires them to take responsbility as well as themselves stop being lazy, unmotivated and feeling entitled. almost every single teacher i know, including family members, think they are underpaid. its a freaking easy as **** degree!!! tons of people have them! you are paid according to the difficulty and desirability of your skills. don't bitch after graduating about your pay, you should have known from the get go what the pay scale was. if you want better pay, you should have gone into medicine, or engineering, or some other technical major.
on top of all of this, in my opinion the biggest reason kids and education fails is the parents. parents treat their kids way different these days, not nearly hard enough on them.
Tax hikes for education in Colorado lose big
Read more: Tax hikes for education in Colorado lose big - The Denver Post (http://www.denverpost.com/election2010/ci_19244420#ixzz1cYPoE4o5) http://www.denverpost.com/election2010/ci_19244420#ixzz1cYPoE4o5
Leftists remind me of those con artists on TV at 2:00am trying to sell everyone on the idea that real estate is the road to the pot at the end of the rainbow.
http://www.motifake.com/image/demotivational-poster/0910/the-pot-of-gold-rainbow-pot-gold-outhouse-toilet-demotivational-poster-1256210799.jpg
Jumpstart
11-02-2011, 08:45
Teachers' hefty salaries are driving up taxes, and they only work 9 or 10 months a year! It's time we put things in perspective and pay them for what they do: babysit! We can get that for minimum wage. That's right. Let's give them $3.00 an hour and only the hours they worked; not any of that silly planning time, or any time they spend before or after school. That would be $19.50 a day (7:45 to 3:.........00 PM with 45 min. off for lunch and plan-- that equals 6 1/2 hours). Each parent should pay $19.50 a day for these teachers to baby-sit their children. Now how many students do they teach in a day...maybe 30? So that's $19.50 x 30 = $585.00 a day. However, remember they only work 180 days a year!!! I am not going to pay them for any vacations. LET'S SEE.... That's $585 X 180= $105,300 per year. (Hold on! My calculator needs new batteries). What about those special education teachers and the ones with Master's degrees? Well, we could pay them minimum wage ($7.75), and just to be fair, round it off to $8.00 an hour. That would be $8 X 6 1/2 hours X 30 children X 180 days = $280,800 per year. Wait a minute! There's something wrong here! There sure is!! The average teacher's salary (nation wide) is $50,000. $50,000/180 days = $277.77 per day/30 students=$9.25/6.5 hours = $1.42 per hour per student; a very inexpensive baby-sitter (and they even EDUCATE your kids!). WHAT A DEAL!!!!!
Mobat555
11-02-2011, 09:02
Teachers' hefty salaries are driving up taxes, and they only work 9 or 10 months a year! It's time we put things in perspective and pay them for what they do: babysit! We can get that for minimum wage. That's right. Let's give them $3.00 an hour and only the hours they worked; not any of that silly planning time, or any time they spend before or after school. That would be $19.50 a day (7:45 to 3:.........00 PM with 45 min. off for lunch and plan-- that equals 6 1/2 hours). Each parent should pay $19.50 a day for these teachers to baby-sit their children. Now how many students do they teach in a day...maybe 30? So that's $19.50 x 30 = $585.00 a day. However, remember they only work 180 days a year!!! I am not going to pay them for any vacations. LET'S SEE.... That's $585 X 180= $105,300 per year. (Hold on! My calculator needs new batteries). What about those special education teachers and the ones with Master's degrees? Well, we could pay them minimum wage ($7.75), and just to be fair, round it off to $8.00 an hour. That would be $8 X 6 1/2 hours X 30 children X 180 days = $280,800 per year. Wait a minute! There's something wrong here! There sure is!! The average teacher's salary (nation wide) is $50,000. $50,000/180 days = $277.77 per day/30 students=$9.25/6.5 hours = $1.42 per hour per student; a very inexpensive baby-sitter (and they even EDUCATE your kids!). WHAT A DEAL!!!!!
Over the past 2 years classes have raised about 5 kids per year. So you can kick that up to 40 kids for most teachers 7th grade and above. Teachers with master/doctorate level education and 10 years experience are the ones making 50k. The ones with just bachelors are making 5-10k less with the same experience.
Laugh all you guys want to about it "being for the children" less educated kids hurt property values and create hooligans. But so long as you don't have to pay the extra $20 a year its worth letting our state rot from the inside.
ColoFarmer
11-02-2011, 09:08
I find it amazing ANYBODY would vote for a tax increase right now...our "representatives" (I use that term loosely...) in government are doing enough to take money out of pockets... Glad it failed.
Zundfolge
11-02-2011, 09:09
Laugh all you guys want to about it "being for the children" less educated kids hurt property values and create hooligans. But so long as you don't have to pay the extra $20 a year its worth letting our state rot from the inside.
For the umpteenth time; DUMPING MORE MONEY INTO THE EDUCATION SYSTEM DOES NOT GET YOU BETTER EDUCATED CHILDREN.
Sheesh. [Bang]
Mobat555
11-02-2011, 09:11
For the umpteenth time; DUMPING MORE MONEY INTO THE EDUCATION SYSTEM DOES NOT GET YOU BETTER EDUCATED CHILDREN.
You mean replacing the money that has already been taken away over the past 3 years. Not putting more into it.
Zundfolge
11-02-2011, 09:14
Yes, the schools already take the biggest chunk of the tax money in the state. There's no reason to give them more and in fact we could probably cut the schools quite a bit before the quality of education was diminished.
Bureaucracies waste most of the money poured into them.
Furthermore had 103 passed it would have caused a lot of these children's parents to be unemployed. The ensuing financial insecurity would do more to damage their intellectual development than schools having less money for condoms and bananas or copies of Howard Zinn's communist propaganda masquerading as history textbooks.
Mobat555
11-02-2011, 09:21
Yes, the schools already take the biggest chunk of the tax money in the state. There's no reason to give them more and in fact we could probably cut the schools quite a bit before the quality of education was diminished.
Bureaucracies waste most of the money poured into them.
The instant you add 5 more kids to a class room (which has already happened) the quality of education has diminished. The zest for educating is not going to last in these teachers when they cannot properly educate due to class size or lack of materials. At that point they will be baby sitters, no hope of anyone learning anything.
I find it amazing ANYBODY would vote for a tax increase right now...our "representatives" (I use that term loosely...) in government are doing enough to take money out of pockets... Glad it failed.
Sadly I do not. There are plenty of people out there who think the government is the solution when the truth is that the government is the problem.
Zundfolge
11-02-2011, 10:44
The instant you add 5 more kids to a class room (which has already happened) the quality of education has diminished.
There's a lot of non sequiturs here.
First off adding students to the class room may not diminish the quality of education (no, I don't take the word of Union teachers who's primary purpose is to decrease work and increase pay, not improve education for children), second the additional tax dollars would not necessarily have gone to the classrooms (there's a history of this ... especially with bills written with "... or other purposes." in them) and 3rd reducing class size still wouldn't rid the curriculum of all the social engineering and other crap that gets in the way of learning (in fact more money would likely increase these).
Also you're not taking into account the law of unintended consequences. So what if schools have more money when the parents of these kids have LESS (many of which a LOT less when they'd have found themselves unemployed ... 103 was going to increase unemployment)?
Why is it that giving bureaucrats and unions more money is "for the kids" but opposing an increase in unemployed parents and the taking of money from parents is somehow not?
Furthermore, it was going to be a lot more than $20/year for most of us (you're missing a couple zeros).
The children of Colorado are better off without 103.
Aloha_Shooter
11-02-2011, 11:00
Laugh all you guys want to about it "being for the children" less educated kids hurt property values and create hooligans. But so long as you don't have to pay the extra $20 a year its worth letting our state rot from the inside.
But it's not the lack of $20/yr that's creating this situation. It's the politically correct crapola from the NEA that's doing that. 50 years ago, we actually had educational standards. Students were taught reading, writing, arithmetic, history (real history instead of the political rewrites common now), civics, etc.
The pedagogists think it's more important that the child have a positive self-image, be "green" and not be judgmental about drug users, homosexuals, multisexuals, etc. than to know how to construct a sentence properly, do basic math or understand how our form of government actually works.
We spend more and get less from our educational system than any other nation on the face of the earth. Apparently most Coloradans understood that means the amount of taxation and spending for "education" has no direct correlation to the educational level of our students. Also apparently, you don't understand that.
Teachers' hefty salaries are driving up taxes, and they only work 9 or 10 months a year! It's time we put things in perspective and pay them for what they do: babysit! We can get that for minimum wage. That's right. Let's give them $3.00 an hour and only the hours they worked; not any of that silly planning time, or any time they spend before or after school. That would be $19.50 a day (7:45 to 3:.........00 PM with 45 min. off for lunch and plan-- that equals 6 1/2 hours). Each parent should pay $19.50 a day for these teachers to baby-sit their children. Now how many students do they teach in a day...maybe 30? So that's $19.50 x 30 = $585.00 a day. However, remember they only work 180 days a year!!! I am not going to pay them for any vacations. LET'S SEE.... That's $585 X 180= $105,300 per year. (Hold mmon! My calculator needs new batteries). What about those special education teachers and the ones with Master's degrees? Well, we could pay them minimum wage ($7.75), and just to be fair, round it off to $8.00 an hour. That would be $8 X 6 1/2 hours X 30 children X 180 days = $280,800 per year. Wait a minute! There's something wrong here! There sure is!! The average teacher's salary (nation wide) is $50,000. $50,000/180 days = $277.77 per day/30 students=$9.25/6.5 hours = $1.42 per hour per student; a very inexpensive baby-sitter (and they even EDUCATE your kids!). WHAT A DEAL!!!!! [BooHoo]
What a worthless post
[BooHoo]
What a worthless post
[Beer]
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.