APS budget is unacceptable

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Thank you. The vacation mafia is focused on the wrong issue

I’m sorry, but there is no way you can’t see the impact in the budget, operations, and everything else.

I just don't think this is the root of all the problems you describe.

DP. It's not. It is a symptom and a big symbol.

Yes, it's a symbol and just that. Can we move on now to the REAL things that impact students and teachers?

Someone really wants to protect their time off.

More vacation for ineffective central office staff = more staff required to get the job done and less money for in school needs. HR has been a shambles now for years. That means subs aren’t getting hired, after school staff isn’t getting hired, and teachers aren’t being supported and vacancies are going unfilled. That affects day to day operations at the schools and affects the quality of learning in the schools.

How many times do I need to say this? I am not a Syphax employee. I am not married to one. I have nothing to gain from vacation policy, I just don't care and want to see us talking about something else that actually matters.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Thank you. The vacation mafia is focused on the wrong issue

I’m sorry, but there is no way you can’t see the impact in the budget, operations, and everything else.

I just don't think this is the root of all the problems you describe.

DP. It's not. It is a symptom and a big symbol.

Yes, it's a symbol and just that. Can we move on now to the REAL things that impact students and teachers?

Someone really wants to protect their time off.

More vacation for ineffective central office staff = more staff required to get the job done and less money for in school needs. HR has been a shambles now for years. That means subs aren’t getting hired, after school staff isn’t getting hired, and teachers aren’t being supported and vacancies are going unfilled. That affects day to day operations at the schools and affects the quality of learning in the schools.

How many times do I need to say this? I am not a Syphax employee. I am not married to one. I have nothing to gain from vacation policy, I just don't care and want to see us talking about something else that actually matters.

+1. Yet another distraction. I don’t wander into this thread anymore because yawn.

[Anonymous]

Let's talk about the "gifted program".
There are schools with 30 and 40% "gifted". Statistically impossible. ANd, if we are going to push in and equity, why don't we make all the gifted teachers SpEd teachers. Seems like a better use of resources.

Yes, my kids are labeled "gifted" by APS but all it means is that there's one useless FTE in every ES.

[Anonymous]

The term “gifted” isn’t used appropriately by many public schools. Having higher ability than a large portion of their peers does not equal giftedness. It means the curriculum has been watered down to better serve those who are average to below average.

What we shouldn’t do is stop funding resources for students who are capable of achieving more — gifted or not.

In what world does it make sense to spend $$$$ dollars on special ed and $ on students who may be some of our best innovators in the future?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The term “gifted” isn’t used appropriately by many public schools. Having higher ability than a large portion of their peers does not equal giftedness. It means the curriculum has been watered down to better serve those who are average to below average.

What we shouldn’t do is stop funding resources for students who are capable of achieving more — gifted or not.

In what world does it make sense to spend $$$$ dollars on special ed and $ on students who may be some of our best innovators in the future?

Well, in this world it makes sense to spend more money for special education because the challenges of special education students to learn and achieve their potential is greater than it is for average and gifted students. You just need to provide materials/opportunities for the latter; but you need to devote more resources, more time, more instruction, more teachers to the former.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The term “gifted” isn’t used appropriately by many public schools. Having higher ability than a large portion of their peers does not equal giftedness. It means the curriculum has been watered down to better serve those who are average to below average.

What we shouldn’t do is stop funding resources for students who are capable of achieving more — gifted or not.

In what world does it make sense to spend $$$$ dollars on special ed and $ on students who may be some of our best innovators in the future?

Well, in this world it makes sense to spend more money for special education because the challenges of special education students to learn and achieve their potential is greater than it is for average and gifted students. You just need to provide materials/opportunities for the latter; but you need to devote more resources, more time, more instruction, more teachers to the former.

I should have also stated that that doesn't necessarily mean only one "$" is the right # of "$s" for those gifted students; only that it makes sense that more "$s" are devoted to special ed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The term “gifted” isn’t used appropriately by many public schools. Having higher ability than a large portion of their peers does not equal giftedness. It means the curriculum has been watered down to better serve those who are average to below average.

What we shouldn’t do is stop funding resources for students who are capable of achieving more — gifted or not.

In what world does it make sense to spend $$$$ dollars on special ed and $ on students who may be some of our best innovators in the future?

Well, in this world it makes sense to spend more money for special education because the challenges of special education students to learn and achieve their potential is greater than it is for average and gifted students. You just need to provide materials/opportunities for the latter; but you need to devote more resources, more time, more instruction, more teachers to the former.

This statement is flat out Not True and an utterly uninformed view! Do you have any idea what "materials/ opportunities" and support and trained teachers and appropriate learning spaces and advanced curriculum & instruction cost? Much of all of these things are needed for gifted students- they have every right to access targeted academic and intellectual growth as their peers!
We should not be so willing to shortchange our promising youth. Many gifted students are not challenged in the classroom and few get the opportunity to really reach their potential given the lack of resources available to them. Why do you think so many families are desperate for their child to attend TJ? It's the extensive "materials/ opportunities" available to them. Many qualified potential TJ students are turned away because there is not funding dedicated to their needs.
Schools need more gifted teachers and materials/ opportunities, not less.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The term “gifted” isn’t used appropriately by many public schools. Having higher ability than a large portion of their peers does not equal giftedness. It means the curriculum has been watered down to better serve those who are average to below average.

What we shouldn’t do is stop funding resources for students who are capable of achieving more — gifted or not.

In what world does it make sense to spend $$$$ dollars on special ed and $ on students who may be some of our best innovators in the future?

Well, in this world it makes sense to spend more money for special education because the challenges of special education students to learn and achieve their potential is greater than it is for average and gifted students. You just need to provide materials/opportunities for the latter; but you need to devote more resources, more time, more instruction, more teachers to the former.

This statement is flat out Not True and an utterly uninformed view! Do you have any idea what "materials/ opportunities" and support and trained teachers and appropriate learning spaces and advanced curriculum & instruction cost? Much of all of these things are needed for gifted students- they have every right to access targeted academic and intellectual growth as their peers!
We should not be so willing to shortchange our promising youth. Many gifted students are not challenged in the classroom and few get the opportunity to really reach their potential given the lack of resources available to them. Why do you think so many families are desperate for their child to attend TJ? It's the extensive "materials/ opportunities" available to them. Many qualified potential TJ students are turned away because there is not funding dedicated to their needs.
Schools need more gifted teachers and materials/ opportunities, not less.

Totally agree, and I know this may sound insensitive, but spending $$$$$$$ on what is essentially respite care for some families at the expense of letting bright/gifted kids reach their true potential is really sad.

We should be spending just as much on gifted education, even if that means cutting back on other services to make it more even.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The term “gifted” isn’t used appropriately by many public schools. Having higher ability than a large portion of their peers does not equal giftedness. It means the curriculum has been watered down to better serve those who are average to below average.

What we shouldn’t do is stop funding resources for students who are capable of achieving more — gifted or not.

In what world does it make sense to spend $$$$ dollars on special ed and $ on students who may be some of our best innovators in the future?

Well, in this world it makes sense to spend more money for special education because the challenges of special education students to learn and achieve their potential is greater than it is for average and gifted students. You just need to provide materials/opportunities for the latter; but you need to devote more resources, more time, more instruction, more teachers to the former.

This statement is flat out Not True and an utterly uninformed view! Do you have any idea what "materials/ opportunities" and support and trained teachers and appropriate learning spaces and advanced curriculum & instruction cost? Much of all of these things are needed for gifted students- they have every right to access targeted academic and intellectual growth as their peers!
We should not be so willing to shortchange our promising youth. Many gifted students are not challenged in the classroom and few get the opportunity to really reach their potential given the lack of resources available to them. Why do you think so many families are desperate for their child to attend TJ? It's the extensive "materials/ opportunities" available to them. Many qualified potential TJ students are turned away because there is not funding dedicated to their needs.
Schools need more gifted teachers and materials/ opportunities, not less.

Totally agree, and I know this may sound insensitive, but spending $$$$$$$ on what is essentially respite care for some families at the expense of letting bright/gifted kids reach their true potential is really sad.

We should be spending just as much on gifted education, even if that means cutting back on other services to make it more even.

Ignorant views like this are exactly why we have laws in place.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The term “gifted” isn’t used appropriately by many public schools. Having higher ability than a large portion of their peers does not equal giftedness. It means the curriculum has been watered down to better serve those who are average to below average.

What we shouldn’t do is stop funding resources for students who are capable of achieving more — gifted or not.

In what world does it make sense to spend $$$$ dollars on special ed and $ on students who may be some of our best innovators in the future?

Well, in this world it makes sense to spend more money for special education because the challenges of special education students to learn and achieve their potential is greater than it is for average and gifted students. You just need to provide materials/opportunities for the latter; but you need to devote more resources, more time, more instruction, more teachers to the former.

This statement is flat out Not True and an utterly uninformed view! Do you have any idea what "materials/ opportunities" and support and trained teachers and appropriate learning spaces and advanced curriculum & instruction cost? Much of all of these things are needed for gifted students- they have every right to access targeted academic and intellectual growth as their peers!
We should not be so willing to shortchange our promising youth. Many gifted students are not challenged in the classroom and few get the opportunity to really reach their potential given the lack of resources available to them. Why do you think so many families are desperate for their child to attend TJ? It's the extensive "materials/ opportunities" available to them. Many qualified potential TJ students are turned away because there is not funding dedicated to their needs.
Schools need more gifted teachers and materials/ opportunities, not less.

Totally agree, and I know this may sound insensitive, but spending $$$$$$$ on what is essentially respite care for some families at the expense of letting bright/gifted kids reach their true potential is really sad.

We should be spending just as much on gifted education, even if that means cutting back on other services to make it more even.

Ignorant views like this are exactly why we have laws in place.

All students deserve a free and appropriate public education, gifted, disabled, and average kids alike. The truth is that it is a zero sum game. Every minute the teacher has to spend on providing intensive support to one kid improperly mainstreamed, that’s a minute she can’t spend educating or supporting the rest of the class. Having a uniformly mediocre group of students is not a worthy goal, although it is an “equitable” one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Thank you. The vacation mafia is focused on the wrong issue

I’m sorry, but there is no way you can’t see the impact in the budget, operations, and everything else.

I just don't think this is the root of all the problems you describe.

DP. It's not. It is a symptom and a big symbol.

Yes, it's a symbol and just that. Can we move on now to the REAL things that impact students and teachers?

Someone really wants to protect their time off.

More vacation for ineffective central office staff = more staff required to get the job done and less money for in school needs. HR has been a shambles now for years. That means subs aren’t getting hired, after school staff isn’t getting hired, and teachers aren’t being supported and vacancies are going unfilled. That affects day to day operations at the schools and affects the quality of learning in the schools.

How many times do I need to say this? I am not a Syphax employee. I am not married to one. I have nothing to gain from vacation policy, I just don't care and want to see us talking about something else that actually matters.

People are telling you why it matters. The quality of support that we give the schools matters. Morale is crap in the schools, and Syphax’s inability to do its job effectively while enjoying superior pay and perks is a big reason why.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Thank you. The vacation mafia is focused on the wrong issue

I’m sorry, but there is no way you can’t see the impact in the budget, operations, and everything else.

I just don't think this is the root of all the problems you describe.

DP. It's not. It is a symptom and a big symbol.

Yes, it's a symbol and just that. Can we move on now to the REAL things that impact students and teachers?

Someone really wants to protect their time off.

More vacation for ineffective central office staff = more staff required to get the job done and less money for in school needs. HR has been a shambles now for years. That means subs aren’t getting hired, after school staff isn’t getting hired, and teachers aren’t being supported and vacancies are going unfilled. That affects day to day operations at the schools and affects the quality of learning in the schools.

How many times do I need to say this? I am not a Syphax employee. I am not married to one. I have nothing to gain from vacation policy, I just don't care and want to see us talking about something else that actually matters.

People are telling you why it matters. The quality of support that we give the schools matters. Morale is crap in the schools, and Syphax’s inability to do its job effectively while enjoying superior pay and perks is a big reason why.

do you really think APS will attract BETTER employees by reducing their pay and benefits? hahahaha. Dream on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The term “gifted” isn’t used appropriately by many public schools. Having higher ability than a large portion of their peers does not equal giftedness. It means the curriculum has been watered down to better serve those who are average to below average.

What we shouldn’t do is stop funding resources for students who are capable of achieving more — gifted or not.

In what world does it make sense to spend $$$$ dollars on special ed and $ on students who may be some of our best innovators in the future?

Well, in this world it makes sense to spend more money for special education because the challenges of special education students to learn and achieve their potential is greater than it is for average and gifted students. You just need to provide materials/opportunities for the latter; but you need to devote more resources, more time, more instruction, more teachers to the former.

This statement is flat out Not True and an utterly uninformed view! Do you have any idea what "materials/ opportunities" and support and trained teachers and appropriate learning spaces and advanced curriculum & instruction cost? Much of all of these things are needed for gifted students- they have every right to access targeted academic and intellectual growth as their peers!
We should not be so willing to shortchange our promising youth. Many gifted students are not challenged in the classroom and few get the opportunity to really reach their potential given the lack of resources available to them. Why do you think so many families are desperate for their child to attend TJ? It's the extensive "materials/ opportunities" available to them. Many qualified potential TJ students are turned away because there is not funding dedicated to their needs.
Schools need more gifted teachers and materials/ opportunities, not less.

Totally agree, and I know this may sound insensitive, but spending $$$$$$$ on what is essentially respite care for some families at the expense of letting bright/gifted kids reach their true potential is really sad.

We should be spending just as much on gifted education, even if that means cutting back on other services to make it more even.

Ignorant views like this are exactly why we have laws in place.

+1

-Parent of SN and gifted kids

[Anonymous]

When will the SB vote on the budget? I'm ready for this thread to disappear into the abyss.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The term “gifted” isn’t used appropriately by many public schools. Having higher ability than a large portion of their peers does not equal giftedness. It means the curriculum has been watered down to better serve those who are average to below average.

What we shouldn’t do is stop funding resources for students who are capable of achieving more — gifted or not.

In what world does it make sense to spend $$$$ dollars on special ed and $ on students who may be some of our best innovators in the future?

Well, in this world it makes sense to spend more money for special education because the challenges of special education students to learn and achieve their potential is greater than it is for average and gifted students. You just need to provide materials/opportunities for the latter; but you need to devote more resources, more time, more instruction, more teachers to the former.

This statement is flat out Not True and an utterly uninformed view! Do you have any idea what "materials/ opportunities" and support and trained teachers and appropriate learning spaces and advanced curriculum & instruction cost? Much of all of these things are needed for gifted students- they have every right to access targeted academic and intellectual growth as their peers!
We should not be so willing to shortchange our promising youth. Many gifted students are not challenged in the classroom and few get the opportunity to really reach their potential given the lack of resources available to them. Why do you think so many families are desperate for their child to attend TJ? It's the extensive "materials/ opportunities" available to them. Many qualified potential TJ students are turned away because there is not funding dedicated to their needs.
Schools need more gifted teachers and materials/ opportunities, not less.

Totally agree, and I know this may sound insensitive, but spending $$$$$$$ on what is essentially respite care for some families at the expense of letting bright/gifted kids reach their true potential is really sad.

We should be spending just as much on gifted education, even if that means cutting back on other services to make it more even.

Ignorant views like this are exactly why we have laws in place.

All students deserve a free and appropriate public education, gifted, disabled, and average kids alike. The truth is that it is a zero sum game. Every minute the teacher has to spend on providing intensive support to one kid improperly mainstreamed, that’s a minute she can’t spend educating or supporting the rest of the class. Having a uniformly mediocre group of students is not a worthy goal, although it is an “equitable” one.

Agree. No one is saying we shouldn’t fund special needs. Of course we should! It should just be more evenly balanced. Everyone deserves a FAPE. Having bright/gifted kids sit there bored to death while the teacher works with struggling learners all day is hardly appropriate.