Can we get MCPS to allow fundraising for staff positions?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Really? You don't understand why people might be upset if School A gets an extra art teacher/reading specialist/media person because School A has a lot of rich parents, but School B does not get an extra art teacher/reading specialist/media person because School B does not have a lot of rich parents?

PP here. The reason I don't understand it is that it does not hurt your child and frees up money in the budget to help other schools.

Inequity, unfairness, and inequality of opportunity hurt my child, your child, and all of us.

So you are purposely making sure that we have overfilled classrooms so that our kids end up with a bad education too. Great. Even though we're willing to spend our own money to make it better, at no cost to any other kids.

I don't know how you got from "people with money are not allowed to buy extra teachers for their kids in the county public school system" to "purposely making sure that you have overfilled classrooms so that your kids end up with a bad education too".

Affluent people in Bethesda and Potomac are already able to buy their kids the best schools in the district -- or so I keep reading on DCUM, although I have my doubts. That's not enough?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This isn't a competition. As I said, I think it's totally reasonable that the Title 1 schools get more funding for teachers. They need it more. That doesn't mean that we shouldn't be able to use private funds to make up for what is -- across the board -- a pathetic dearth of teachers.
If I could raise taxes just for more teachers, to then be spread across all of MoCo (not just my school), I'd happily do it. But we can't. So why not let people give money voluntarily in their own communities?

Yes, we can! And I mean that sincerely.

Or people can give money voluntarily for the schools in their community, which are the schools in Montgomery County Public Schools.

Or people can give money voluntarily -- all they want! -- for their own children's very own schools. There are plenty of things the schools are allowed to do with that money! The only thing the schools are not allowed to do with that money is buy more teachers.

No we can't. We can't possibly get a tax raise at this point. No time soon, anyway. The pendulum shift is currently against education funding around here. If I were super rich, I'd donate a couple million to MCPS with the strings attached that they must hire X more teachers with that money. But I can't do that. But my little neighborhood as a whole could probably pony up enough for 2-3 teachers' aides at our school. But we don't have the kind of money that makes an impact across a whole system.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

No we can't. We can't possibly get a tax raise at this point. No time soon, anyway. The pendulum shift is currently against education funding around here. If I were super rich, I'd donate a couple million to MCPS with the strings attached that they must hire X more teachers with that money. But I can't do that. But my little neighborhood as a whole could probably pony up enough for 2-3 teachers' aides at our school. But we don't have the kind of money that makes an impact across a whole system.

Yes, we can. Don't give up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Really? You don't understand why people might be upset if School A gets an extra art teacher/reading specialist/media person because School A has a lot of rich parents, but School B does not get an extra art teacher/reading specialist/media person because School B does not have a lot of rich parents?

PP here. The reason I don't understand it is that it does not hurt your child and frees up money in the budget to help other schools.

Inequity, unfairness, and inequality of opportunity hurt my child, your child, and all of us.

So you are purposely making sure that we have overfilled classrooms so that our kids end up with a bad education too. Great. Even though we're willing to spend our own money to make it better, at no cost to any other kids.

I don't know how you got from "people with money are not allowed to buy extra teachers for their kids in the county public school system" to "purposely making sure that you have overfilled classrooms so that your kids end up with a bad education too".

Affluent people in Bethesda and Potomac are already able to buy their kids the best schools in the district -- or so I keep reading on DCUM, although I have my doubts. That's not enough?

Really? YOu don't get the logic? It's pretty obvious. A Kindergarten classroom with 26 kids and one teacher is a bad situation. If I were allowed to, my neighbors and I could change that. We're not allowed to. Therefore, that rule is making it so the kids are getting a sub-par education. I would like that to change across the entire system. But I'm not Bill Gates. SO I can't do that myself, and the political will doesn't exist right now to do that.
And I do not agree that the affluent people in Bethesda/CC/Potomac have the best schools in the district. Or, if they do, then the best schools in the district are pretty crappy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

So you are purposely making sure that we have overfilled classrooms so that our kids end up with a bad education too. Great. Even though we're willing to spend our own money to make it better, at no cost to any other kids.

As the PP said, if you want your children to have access to smaller class sizes in K-3, you can send them to a Title 1 or Focus school. Likewise, if I want my children to have access to the foreign-language offerings at Whitman, I can -- well, actually, I can't do anything, because I can't afford to live in the Whitman zone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Really? YOu don't get the logic? It's pretty obvious. A Kindergarten classroom with 26 kids and one teacher is a bad situation. If I were allowed to, my neighbors and I could change that. We're not allowed to. Therefore, that rule is making it so the kids are getting a sub-par education. I would like that to change across the entire system. But I'm not Bill Gates. SO I can't do that myself, and the political will doesn't exist right now to do that.
And I do not agree that the affluent people in Bethesda/CC/Potomac have the best schools in the district. Or, if they do, then the best schools in the district are pretty crappy.

Then move to wherever the best schools in the district are. If you can afford to live in Bethesda/Chevy Chase/Potomac, then you can also afford to live wherever the best schools in the district are.

Or, if you don't want to move, then keep fighting to improve the system for all kids in the district. Not a private-public solution for just your kids -- all kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

So you are purposely making sure that we have overfilled classrooms so that our kids end up with a bad education too. Great. Even though we're willing to spend our own money to make it better, at no cost to any other kids.

As the PP said, if you want your children to have access to smaller class sizes in K-3, you can send them to a Title 1 or Focus school. Likewise, if I want my children to have access to the foreign-language offerings at Whitman, I can -- well, actually, I can't do anything, because I can't afford to live in the Whitman zone.

You probably can afford to live in WHitman zone, but not in the kind of house you want to live in. There are apartments in the Whitman zone, probably which cost less than your mortgage. And really, how does it help the kids at the Title 1 or Focus school for my kids to have a lousy K year?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Really? YOu don't get the logic? It's pretty obvious. A Kindergarten classroom with 26 kids and one teacher is a bad situation. If I were allowed to, my neighbors and I could change that. We're not allowed to. Therefore, that rule is making it so the kids are getting a sub-par education. I would like that to change across the entire system. But I'm not Bill Gates. SO I can't do that myself, and the political will doesn't exist right now to do that.
And I do not agree that the affluent people in Bethesda/CC/Potomac have the best schools in the district. Or, if they do, then the best schools in the district are pretty crappy.

Then move to wherever the best schools in the district are. If you can afford to live in Bethesda/Chevy Chase/Potomac, then you can also afford to live wherever the best schools in the district are.

Or, if you don't want to move, then keep fighting to improve the system for all kids in the district. Not a private-public solution for just your kids -- all kids.

I actually *do* fight for those things, but in the meantime, my kids' education sucks. And I can't tell them to wait until stuff gets fixed. We're standing on principle here when there are real kids at stake, and we have the ability to make it better for them but aren't. For some theoretical reason, since there is no actual harm to doing so.
YOu really don't know where I can afford to live. I live in a cheap little old house in Bethesda. Not Whitman district. I can't move far because i have old people to take care of. At this point, I wouldn't know where to go, except outside MCPS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Really? YOu don't get the logic? It's pretty obvious. A Kindergarten classroom with 26 kids and one teacher is a bad situation. If I were allowed to, my neighbors and I could change that. We're not allowed to. Therefore, that rule is making it so the kids are getting a sub-par education. I would like that to change across the entire system. But I'm not Bill Gates. SO I can't do that myself, and the political will doesn't exist right now to do that.
And I do not agree that the affluent people in Bethesda/CC/Potomac have the best schools in the district. Or, if they do, then the best schools in the district are pretty crappy.

Then move to wherever the best schools in the district are. If you can afford to live in Bethesda/Chevy Chase/Potomac, then you can also afford to live wherever the best schools in the district are.

Or, if you don't want to move, then keep fighting to improve the system for all kids in the district. Not a private-public solution for just your kids -- all kids.

I find this silly. WE DON'T HAVE A REAL PUBLIC SOLUTION! I'd love it if we did, but we don't. I advocate for it, and won't stop advocating for it, but we don't have it. WE could have a private/public solution in the interim, but we can't do that because "it's not fair". WHAT? It reminds me of the Vonnegut story, Harrison Bergeron. Is the fear that if the schools with rich parents get better, then the rich parents will stop trying to make the system as a whole better? I feel like we could solve that problem. Like, if you want to raise funds for extra aides/teachers at your school, you have to raise matching funds that go into the system as a whole. So, Bannockburn PTA can put $100k toward two new teachers' aides, but they have to put $100k in matching funds into the general fund.
Otherwise, you know what's going to happen over time? The rich Whitman parents will gradually move more kids to private. Because the class sizes aren't going to support the reputation of "good schools" for much longer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

You probably can afford to live in WHitman zone, but not in the kind of house you want to live in. There are apartments in the Whitman zone, probably which cost less than your mortgage. And really, how does it help the kids at the Title 1 or Focus school for my kids to have a lousy K year?

Please find an apartment for 4 people in the Whitman zone for $775/month. Thanks!

And again, if you think that your children are having a lousy K year because of large class sizes, then you should consider sending them to a Title 1 or Focus school next year. Class sizes are smaller in those schools, as I'm sure you know.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In a recent conversation with our elementary school principal, a parent asked if we could do fundraising for an additional teacher for that particular grade, since we were only 1-2 kids short of the number needed for a 4th class.

The teacher said that, unlike in DCPS, MCPS does not allow you to fundraise for staff positions.

Why not? That doesn't seem to make sense!

At our school in Bethesda, I think a lot of parents would be fine with donating something and getting us over the top. It would seem to be a win-win because then we get the additional staff position, but we are not taking money away from a school where the parents are not in a position to donate.

Any hope of changing this?

I am sure you are right.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I find this silly. WE DON'T HAVE A REAL PUBLIC SOLUTION! I'd love it if we did, but we don't. I advocate for it, and won't stop advocating for it, but we don't have it. WE could have a private/public solution in the interim, but we can't do that because "it's not fair". WHAT? It reminds me of the Vonnegut story, Harrison Bergeron. Is the fear that if the schools with rich parents get better, then the rich parents will stop trying to make the system as a whole better? I feel like we could solve that problem. Like, if you want to raise funds for extra aides/teachers at your school, you have to raise matching funds that go into the system as a whole. So, Bannockburn PTA can put $100k toward two new teachers' aides, but they have to put $100k in matching funds into the general fund.
Otherwise, you know what's going to happen over time? The rich Whitman parents will gradually move more kids to private. Because the class sizes aren't going to support the reputation of "good schools" for much longer.

That's not the reason, but yes, actually, if rich parents can buy more teachers for their children's schools, then they will have much less incentive to advocate for more teachers for other children's schools. After all, more teachers for other children's schools won't benefit their children, right?

And please remember -- you can put $100,000 towards any number of things in your children's schools. The ONLY thing you can't do with the $100,000 is buy more teachers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

You probably can afford to live in WHitman zone, but not in the kind of house you want to live in. There are apartments in the Whitman zone, probably which cost less than your mortgage. And really, how does it help the kids at the Title 1 or Focus school for my kids to have a lousy K year?

Please find an apartment for 4 people in the Whitman zone for $775/month. Thanks!

And again, if you think that your children are having a lousy K year because of large class sizes, then you should consider sending them to a Title 1 or Focus school next year. Class sizes are smaller in those schools, as I'm sure you know.

You can keep saying the "move to a Title 1" school thing all you want, but I've already answered it. I can't move away from the grandparents i need to help. And, also, it's kind of traumatic for kids to leave their friends and start all over socially (some kids have a harder time with that than others -- one of mine would have a VERY hard time with it).
And no, this isn't about fear of brown/black people. We're brown people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Totally agree with you, but the schools with lower income parent populations feel it's unfair. Of course, it's not taking anything from their kids and the TItle 1 schools do get more teachers per student (which seems reasonable to me). So I think it's a specious argument. I've seen my kid get basically zero attention all year in her enormous K class with one teacher.

Of course not. The schools are separate but equal. Right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I agree with OP.

I remember reading an article from 2012 about how French President Hollande had proposed banning homework in an effort to level the playing field. He said homework favors the wealthy because they have parents with the time and energy to help them with their homework. I guess his idea was that, instead of allowing some kids to benefit from homework, it's better to bring all kids down to a lower level (since equality is the #1 goal).

I don't get why people would oppose having parents help a school fund staff positions. Since it doesn't hurt your school (but only helps the other school), it seems kind of petty to oppose it.

There are many studies about the LACK of benefits of homework.

Parents who want for their children to do extra work are free to give them worksheets, tutoring sessions, etc. as they please.