Protest Hogan's diversion of public funds from public schools into private schools

[Anonymous]

I think it's reprehensible to take $ from public and divert to private. But I think it's equally reprehensible to continue the status quo of funding schools based on property taxes. Basically, you are all fine with the kids in Potomac having awesome schools (because that's what the community can pay for) and fine with poorer communities having poor schools.

Is that right? Well, I think it's time for change. I don't support privatizing schools as the change. I actually support a more equitable spread of funding from all over the state being more equitably distributed.

I have a kid in private because MCPS couldn't meet our needs. I will be happy to take my tax dollars with me as well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think it's reprehensible to take $ from public and divert to private. But I think it's equally reprehensible to continue the status quo of funding schools based on property taxes. Basically, you are all fine with the kids in Potomac having awesome schools (because that's what the community can pay for) and fine with poorer communities having poor schools.

Is that right? Well, I think it's time for change. I don't support privatizing schools as the change. I actually support a more equitable spread of funding from all over the state being more equitably distributed.

I have a kid in private because MCPS couldn't meet our needs. I will be happy to take my tax dollars with me as well.

Money is not the issue. MCPS allocated over $13,000 per student in 2011. I don't know what the numbers are today, but I imagine PP spending is anywhere from $15,000 to $20,000. Redistributing the wealth won't amount to a hill of beans unless they implement true equitable practices by decreasing class sizes and eliminating all the useless meetings to attend and mounds of paperwork to complete.

This is money spent inefficiently across the board. I could go on forever, but that's simply wasted effort, as the county fails to identify its own flawed thinkingl

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And the public school wastes loads and loads of money on things like abstract art...

Huh? Which public school, how much money, and what "abstract art"? Are you saying that art instruction in MCPS should only include representational art?

No..stupid statues in the courtyards etc. .

Which statues in which courtyards are stupid, and how much did MCPS pay for them?

Also the county does dumb things like build Rocky Hill MS and then 7-8 years later rebuilds and it and turns it into a HS and then rebuilds Rocky Hill HS in another location...total waste of tax payer money.

Agree. They have done this in our district too. No one thinks long term. So many other counties and schools add an entire level that is built out but not finished. So much cheaper for growing districts in the long run. Not MCPS. They have to continue to build massive additions eating up more land and fields from the school.

They waste so much money.

+1 to this.

So much money wasted. Often due to poor planning.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If less children are in the public school due to vouchers , doesn't that make the class sizes smaller and reduce the cost of the system?

This. Can someone explain why not?

Not necessarily. In s small city school system, it would make class sizes smaller, but they'd likely have to cut specials teachers etc. Any state that has a system where residents have to vote for school levies (like Ohio) have seen this happen. There were years where the arts and sports programming were all pay to play. In systems like MD, where the schools are run by counties, eventually the schools would shift boundaries. For example, if each grade lost eight kids, in one school that may only be two or three kids per class, but school might lose 56 students. If that happened to five or six schools within a given geographic area, the schools would be redistricted to account for the loss. One school might close of the six depending on the state rated capacity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's reprehensible to take $ from public and divert to private. But I think it's equally reprehensible to continue the status quo of funding schools based on property taxes. Basically, you are all fine with the kids in Potomac having awesome schools (because that's what the community can pay for) and fine with poorer communities having poor schools.

Is that right? Well, I think it's time for change. I don't support privatizing schools as the change. I actually support a more equitable spread of funding from all over the state being more equitably distributed.

I have a kid in private because MCPS couldn't meet our needs. I will be happy to take my tax dollars with me as well.

Money is not the issue. MCPS allocated over $13,000 per student in 2011. I don't know what the numbers are today, but I imagine PP spending is anywhere from $15,000 to $20,000. Redistributing the wealth won't amount to a hill of beans unless they implement true equitable practices by decreasing class sizes and eliminating all the useless meetings to attend and mounds of paperwork to complete.

This is money spent inefficiently across the board. I could go on forever, but that's simply wasted effort, as the county fails to identify its own flawed thinkingl

Agree. This all comes down to the BOE never cutting corners. Never going thru audits and seeing where to save money. What works, what doesn't. Instead they just continue to ask the state for more money. And Hogan as a deficit. He doesn't want to raise state or sales taxes. Yet people in MCPS still think he should find $ for just them while continue to build more condo and apartment buildings all over the county.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's reprehensible to take $ from public and divert to private. But I think it's equally reprehensible to continue the status quo of funding schools based on property taxes. Basically, you are all fine with the kids in Potomac having awesome schools (because that's what the community can pay for) and fine with poorer communities having poor schools.

Is that right? Well, I think it's time for change. I don't support privatizing schools as the change. I actually support a more equitable spread of funding from all over the state being more equitably distributed.

I have a kid in private because MCPS couldn't meet our needs. I will be happy to take my tax dollars with me as well.

Money is not the issue. MCPS allocated over $13,000 per student in 2011. I don't know what the numbers are today, but I imagine PP spending is anywhere from $15,000 to $20,000. Redistributing the wealth won't amount to a hill of beans unless they implement true equitable practices by decreasing class sizes and eliminating all the useless meetings to attend and mounds of paperwork to complete.

This is money spent inefficiently across the board. I could go on forever, but that's simply wasted effort, as the county fails to identify its own flawed thinkingl

I don't think reducing class size is necessarily the answer to better quality education either. I'm an UMC mom and I spend oodles of time at home educating my children. I have one in public magnet and one in private. Private parochial teacher used to teach underprivileged kids and said teaching 30 private school kids at once was easier than teaching 15 inner city in one class.

Parent involvement in a child's education/development is critical for their success and socioeconomic play a huge part in this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's reprehensible to take $ from public and divert to private. But I think it's equally reprehensible to continue the status quo of funding schools based on property taxes. Basically, you are all fine with the kids in Potomac having awesome schools (because that's what the community can pay for) and fine with poorer communities having poor schools.

Is that right? Well, I think it's time for change. I don't support privatizing schools as the change. I actually support a more equitable spread of funding from all over the state being more equitably distributed.

I have a kid in private because MCPS couldn't meet our needs. I will be happy to take my tax dollars with me as well.

Money is not the issue. MCPS allocated over $13,000 per student in 2011. I don't know what the numbers are today, but I imagine PP spending is anywhere from $15,000 to $20,000. Redistributing the wealth won't amount to a hill of beans unless they implement true equitable practices by decreasing class sizes and eliminating all the useless meetings to attend and mounds of paperwork to complete.

This is money spent inefficiently across the board. I could go on forever, but that's simply wasted effort, as the county fails to identify its own flawed thinkingl

I don't think reducing class size is necessarily the answer to better quality education either. I'm an UMC mom and I spend oodles of time at home educating my children. I have one in public magnet and one in private. Private parochial teacher used to teach underprivileged kids and said teaching 30 private school kids at once was easier than teaching 15 inner city in one class.

Parent involvement in a child's education/development is critical for their success and socioeconomic play a huge part in this.

While I agree that the parental responsibility must be there, class sizes of 15 is still idea. I've had inclusion classes of over 30 kids, with about half with IEPs. It was reprehensible. Nothing was accomplished, and everyone just turned a blind eye despite the complaints from staff members in the same boat.

I'm not sure if your children have ever been in a "regular" setting. But private schools (I'm a product, and one child started off in a parochial.) can determine who stays and who goes. So the kids either learn to behave or they're out. This isn't the case in public, especially with the non-existent disciplinary measures. So yes, 30 kids in private may be fine, but I'll take 15 difficult kids in a public setting over 30 any old day. Furthermore, privates are excluded from the mounds of paperwork, ridiculous meetings and state testing. A teacher has the time to plan.

To be fair, PP, I don't think you can speak to the "masses" with a private school child and a magnet student. Magnets take the cream of the crop. Behaviors are not usually an issue.

[Anonymous]

The problem is that people take free education for granted...but tax payers can't afford to pay more, more all the time particularly when resources are misused.

People including children need to understand that there must be consequences for poor actions. If there are 5 disruptive kids out of 30, they'll take all the teacher's time and it's not fair to the other 25 kids. It's also not fair to the taxpayer to pay double the cost.

If you took these kids our of the regular class, you'd need only 1/6 more teachers than the double you are suggesting. I also know because I have a teacher relative that teaches in a poorer area of MC that class sizes there are already reduced. Perhaps by changing the model, there wouldn't be a need for more, more taxes.

Also if kids know that by acting out, they'll be sent to the special school that maybe they won't act out.

[Anonymous]

Vouchers should not go to students who are already in Private.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The problem is that people take free education for granted...but tax payers can't afford to pay more, more all the time particularly when resources are misused.

People including children need to understand that there must be consequences for poor actions. If there are 5 disruptive kids out of 30, they'll take all the teacher's time and it's not fair to the other 25 kids. It's also not fair to the taxpayer to pay double the cost.

If you took these kids our of the regular class, you'd need only 1/6 more teachers than the double you are suggesting. I also know because I have a teacher relative that teaches in a poorer area of MC that class sizes there are already reduced. Perhaps by changing the model, there wouldn't be a need for more, more taxes.

Also if kids know that by acting out, they'll be sent to the special school that maybe they won't act out.

Is it also not fair to the taxpayer to pay double the cost for children with disabilities? Just wondering.

This taxpayer's opinion is, we pay to educate the children that actually exist, even if that costs more than educating the ideal (meaning, cheapest-to-educate) child.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

While I agree that the parental responsibility must be there, class sizes of 15 is still idea. I've had inclusion classes of over 30 kids, with about half with IEPs. It was reprehensible. Nothing was accomplished, and everyone just turned a blind eye despite the complaints from staff members in the same boat.

I'm not sure if your children have ever been in a "regular" setting. But private schools (I'm a product, and one child started off in a parochial.) can determine who stays and who goes. So the kids either learn to behave or they're out. This isn't the case in public, especially with the non-existent disciplinary measures. So yes, 30 kids in private may be fine, but I'll take 15 difficult kids in a public setting over 30 any old day. Furthermore, privates are excluded from the mounds of paperwork, ridiculous meetings and state testing. A teacher has the time to plan.

To be fair, PP, I don't think you can speak to the "masses" with a private school child and a magnet student. Magnets take the cream of the crop. Behaviors are not usually an issue.

No? As I've said before, the elementary magnet program is the Center Program for the Highly Gifted, not the Center Program for the Highly Well-Behaved.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The problem is that people take free education for granted...but tax payers can't afford to pay more, more all the time particularly when resources are misused.

People including children need to understand that there must be consequences for poor actions. If there are 5 disruptive kids out of 30, they'll take all the teacher's time and it's not fair to the other 25 kids. It's also not fair to the taxpayer to pay double the cost.

If you took these kids our of the regular class, you'd need only 1/6 more teachers than the double you are suggesting. I also know because I have a teacher relative that teaches in a poorer area of MC that class sizes there are already reduced. Perhaps by changing the model, there wouldn't be a need for more, more taxes.

Also if kids know that by acting out, they'll be sent to the special school that maybe they won't act out.

Is it also not fair to the taxpayer to pay double the cost for children with disabilities? Just wondering.

This taxpayer's opinion is, we pay to educate the children that actually exist, even if that costs more than educating the ideal (meaning, cheapest-to-educate) child.

I agree that kids with real disabilities should get appropriate resources...but that still means doing it in a fiscal responsible way.

I also think school choice would make public schools more efficient. My kid's private costs less than the per pupil cost at public by a long shot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

While I agree that the parental responsibility must be there, class sizes of 15 is still idea. I've had inclusion classes of over 30 kids, with about half with IEPs. It was reprehensible. Nothing was accomplished, and everyone just turned a blind eye despite the complaints from staff members in the same boat.

I'm not sure if your children have ever been in a "regular" setting. But private schools (I'm a product, and one child started off in a parochial.) can determine who stays and who goes. So the kids either learn to behave or they're out. This isn't the case in public, especially with the non-existent disciplinary measures. So yes, 30 kids in private may be fine, but I'll take 15 difficult kids in a public setting over 30 any old day. Furthermore, privates are excluded from the mounds of paperwork, ridiculous meetings and state testing. A teacher has the time to plan.

To be fair, PP, I don't think you can speak to the "masses" with a private school child and a magnet student. Magnets take the cream of the crop. Behaviors are not usually an issue.

No? As I've said before, the elementary magnet program is the Center Program for the Highly Gifted, not the Center Program for the Highly Well-Behaved.

Honey, and I write this as respectfully as possible, unless you're in the system, as I am, you have no right to chime in. Magnet kids are MUCH easier to handle than some gang members who are only in school to recruit members.

[Anonymous]

If you don't go along with vouchers.. Upper middle class people are going to move out of your district to places that do. You cannot avoid competition and responsible people are going to immediately do what is good for their children. The public schools are going to be repositories for completely irresponsible and dysfunctional families.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The problem is that people take free education for granted...but tax payers can't afford to pay more, more all the time particularly when resources are misused.

People including children need to understand that there must be consequences for poor actions. If there are 5 disruptive kids out of 30, they'll take all the teacher's time and it's not fair to the other 25 kids. It's also not fair to the taxpayer to pay double the cost.

If you took these kids our of the regular class, you'd need only 1/6 more teachers than the double you are suggesting. I also know because I have a teacher relative that teaches in a poorer area of MC that class sizes there are already reduced. Perhaps by changing the model, there wouldn't be a need for more, more taxes.

Also if kids know that by acting out, they'll be sent to the special school that maybe they won't act out.

Is it also not fair to the taxpayer to pay double the cost for children with disabilities? Just wondering.

This taxpayer's opinion is, we pay to educate the children that actually exist, even if that costs more than educating the ideal (meaning, cheapest-to-educate) child.

I agree that kids with real disabilities should get appropriate resources...but that still means doing it in a fiscal responsible way.

I also think school choice would make public schools more efficient. My kid's private costs less than the per pupil cost at public by a long shot.

Nobody advocates for doing things in a fiscally irresponsible way. The issue is that they are doing it in a way that they consider fiscally responsible, and you consider fiscally irresponsible.

Your kid's private probably costs less than the average per-pupil cost in MCPS for two reasons:

1. It doesn't admit students with significant disabilities.
2. It pays its teachers a lot less.

I don't think that's a good model for a public school system.