Don't forget to vote http://i266.photobucket.com/albums/i...sgn108VOTE.gif
Printable View
Don't forget to vote http://i266.photobucket.com/albums/i...sgn108VOTE.gif
Dropped off my ballot yesterday with a big ol no on 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by ghettodub
Same and same
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 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.Quote:
Originally Posted by ghettodub
Also voted no on extending term limits for the County Attorney. 8 years is enough, now go do something productive.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rooskibar03
^thisQuote:
Originally Posted by TFOGGER
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
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rooskibar03
Don't fall for the lie that more money equals better schools.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rooskibar03
http://broken-government.com/wp-cont...to-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)
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.
Also note that Colorado Schools already rank decently high (17th in the nation according to this group) and yet we don't spend as much per pupil as many other states that are doing much worse. See this chart (it's real big or I'd have IMG tagged it).
At any rate, a "temporary tax" is like "temporary herpes".
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.
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!Quote:
Originally Posted by jerrymrc
Bring back dodgeball and many of our educational system woes would "go way."
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!
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.
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 ...
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).Quote:
Originally Posted by jackthewall81
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by jackthewall81
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.
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?
Sources please? Because I already posted a chart 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).Quote:
Originally Posted by jackthewall81
Privatize and de-unionize the system.Quote:
Originally Posted by jackthewall81
In 1837 the compulsory government/union monopoly of education began with the institution of a system built on the Prussian model, 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.
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rooskibar03
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."
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zundfolge
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
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).Quote:
Originally Posted by OneGuy67
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zundfolge
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.
No, you're probably right. That's why vouchers are probably the best realistic idea out there.Quote:
Originally Posted by jackthewall81
voted no! public schools are a joke and should be done away with.
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by OneGuy67
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.
You pay $6,500 in property taxes!! Holy cow!Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeT
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zundfolge
Nothing will fix this.Quote:
Originally Posted by Byte Stryke
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.
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...ge-tuition.jpg
Yes, yes and yes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Byte Stryke
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.
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?Quote:
Originally Posted by OneGuy67
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aloha_Shooter
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zundfolge
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by BigBear
Quote:
Originally Posted by jhood001
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
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rooskibar03
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.
this graph looks amazingly just like the federal bailout obama said would save us....keep throwing money at it, yet nothing changes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zundfolge
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.