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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


Generally these programs are for kids whose needs are not being met in public. Would you rather pay the societal costs later or invest now?

Generally? We are not talking here about public school systems paying private schools for students with disabilities, for whom the public school system is unable to provide a free and appropriate education. We are talking about vouchers for parents to use public money to pay private schools.

Exactly. I'm the pp. There are many kids whose needs are not being met in public school, and it's not because of disabilities. Go read the independent school forum or visit some of the area privates. MCPS uses a cookie cutter, or as some say "factory model" of education. Many kids need project-based learning, or less disruptive classrooms, or a school with lots of breaks for physical activity. Why limit that option to just the wealthy? All our kids deserve an education that motivates them. Privates grant financial aid, but these schools will benefit from additional government funds. Many of the kids in MD go to Catholic, Jewish, or Muslim schools (per the Baltimore Sun article posted upstream). These schools teach values; they use a virtues-based curriculum, which ironically was developed by a former MCPS "teacher of the year" who couldn't get MCPS to adopt this system. Kids from difficult backgrounds need very nurturing schools. Many public schools are so overcrowded and the teachers are so overwhelmed with bureaucracy and heterogeneous classrooms (see above thread from teachers) that they just can't reach these kids as well as small privates. The vouchers give these kids another chance, and the parents work hard to support their kids. By the way, have you asked where your public school teachers send their kids to school? I was surprised to learn how many MCPS teachers send their own kids to private schools.

If there are many kids whose needs are not being met in public school, then the solution is to improve the public school system. The solution is not to spend tax dollars to send kids to private school, because we already know that doesn't work. (And, in the case of tax dollars for religious schools, it's also counter to the First Amendment.)

Yes, the solution would be to improve the system, but it's not happening. Like another pp, I voiced opposition to Prometheon boards, PowerPoint lessons in lieu of more physical activity, etc. However, MCPS ignored parent input.

We need to work on improving public schools, obviously, but we can't also turn a blind eye to innovations like charter schools and vouchers. For some kids, public works. I wish I wasn't paying tuition for private. But I'm also thrilled that DC provides Opportunity Scholarships for disadvantaged families in DC. I'd like to see MD do more of the same. Why shouldn't inner city Baltimore kids go to McDonough and other top privates with some aid?

Those studies posted are lengthy, full of regression analysis, which I'll read later...but even the Ohio study found that voucher kids are more likely to attend college. Now are they attending crappy colleges? Perhaps. But I also know of DC voucher kids who made it to the very top colleges and universities in the nation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Yes, the solution would be to improve the system, but it's not happening. Like another pp, I voiced opposition to Prometheon boards, PowerPoint lessons in lieu of more physical activity, etc. However, MCPS ignored parent input.

We need to work on improving public schools, obviously, but we can't also turn a blind eye to innovations like charter schools and vouchers. For some kids, public works. I wish I wasn't paying tuition for private. But I'm also thrilled that DC provides Opportunity Scholarships for disadvantaged families in DC. I'd like to see MD do more of the same. Why shouldn't inner city Baltimore kids go to McDonough and other top privates with some aid?

Those studies posted are lengthy, full of regression analysis, which I'll read later...but even the Ohio study found that voucher kids are more likely to attend college. Now are they attending crappy colleges? Perhaps. But I also know of DC voucher kids who made it to the very top colleges and universities in the nation.

How many Baltimore kids, and what's stopping McDonogh and other "top privates" from letting them go now?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Be careful. They make the same arguments now. Families don't live in apartments! Developers don't need to fund schools! Millennials won't have many kids!

"They" who? Who is actually saying that families don't live in apartments, developers don't need to fund schools, and millennials won't have many kids? (By the way, do you have any data on how many kids millennials are having?) I follow planning in Montgomery County pretty closely, and I have never actually heard or read anybody official saying any of those things, though I have heard and read many assertions that they do.

It's hard to follow. Bruce Crespell, who recently left MCPS, was Head of Planning. He made these statements. Then the MCPS piss-poor projections are passed on to County Planning and they follow the numbers.

Where, when, and what documentation do you have for it? Given that he provided data on numbers of students in MCPS who live in apartments, it seems very hard to believe that he would ever say that families don't live in apartments.

Fine. I was exaggerating the statements, but that's certainly the gist of what he said at community meetings. Had he listened to us, MCPS could have saved millions on poorly planned school additions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Poor people can't afford to make up the tuition difference and Sidwell and St Albans have plenty of applicants who can fully self-pay w/o tuition assistance.

This is why vouchers are not going to work for the people they are mainly intended for. This is why many middle-class families object. Middle class = too much income for vouchers, but not enough money to afford private.

Oh, but Sidwell and St. Alban's even give scholarship money beyond the voucher amount to make up the difference in family need.
The middle class objections? There you have hit the nail on the head.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Hey OP, Hogan DID increase the budget funds last year. He just didn't increase it as much as expensive MCPS wanted so they cry and cry. Then threaten to increase ratios to get nimwits like you to start sending complaints. They know if they cut from the top for more $, no one would care.

Have you seen the bloated budget plan? Do you see the overhead? Did you see the mismanaged of funds? Do you truly believe the FIRST thing to cut in the plan was teachers? Come on now.

I think you need to send your complaints to the county BOE. Ask why the BOE encourages that the county continues to be a sanctuary city when the funding isn't even there for legal kids. Ask why they continue to offer programs to a small select group of kids by lottery that cost millions to run every year. Ask why they spent 10 million changing bell times by 20min. Ask why they continue the PEP program even though schools are falling apart. Ask why PTA's are allowed to use for-profit fundraisers for "school needs" and not notify parents where their money they donated is really going. Ask about costs of chrome books, promethium boards, and other computers. Ask why your 9% property tax fee increase isn't enough?

You know, all the things the state looks at from EACH county before deciding where to allocate funds.

+1 I think even the Council is fed up with MCPS. The system needs better oversight. Poor budgeting, capacity planning, too much administrative overhead. We moved to a private school, where the Head of School still teaches one class. Contrast that to MCPS where administrators don't teach. In fact, they promote great teachers into administration!

I volunteered in a high poverty DCPS high school. There the principal complained that charters siphoned off "the good" kids, leaving her with more challenges. This issue is tricky. The federal and state government already fund many religious charities and social service organizations. Should all grants stop? What makes school different?

If there was more CHOICE in MCPS, things might be different. But as the schools get increasingly homogenized via mandated testing, curriculum, and procedures, and as class sizes grow, I think you have to help parents who need to try a different approach for their kids. It's not fair that only the wealthy should have the option of private school. Private religious schools do work better for some kids...and we can't let more kids continue to fail within the public school system. There are DC voucher kids at our private religious school and it is obvious that this education is transforming their lives.

[Anonymous]

Perhaps all MCPS public schools should be lottery? That's choice. Make the choice be within the current system. There is plenty of good in MCPS... along with plenty of mediocre.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Be careful. They make the same arguments now. Families don't live in apartments! Developers don't need to fund schools! Millennials won't have many kids!

"They" who? Who is actually saying that families don't live in apartments, developers don't need to fund schools, and millennials won't have many kids? (By the way, do you have any data on how many kids millennials are having?) I follow planning in Montgomery County pretty closely, and I have never actually heard or read anybody official saying any of those things, though I have heard and read many assertions that they do.

Look at the case of Bethesda Elementary School--it was overcrowded before the addition was finished. Because the projections used didn't take into the account the potential for families living in new apartments/condos nearby.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Be careful. They make the same arguments now. Families don't live in apartments! Developers don't need to fund schools! Millennials won't have many kids!

"They" who? Who is actually saying that families don't live in apartments, developers don't need to fund schools, and millennials won't have many kids? (By the way, do you have any data on how many kids millennials are having?) I follow planning in Montgomery County pretty closely, and I have never actually heard or read anybody official saying any of those things, though I have heard and read many assertions that they do.

Look at the case of Bethesda Elementary School--it was overcrowded before the addition was finished. Because the projections used didn't take into the account the potential for families living in new apartments/condos nearby.

Or because the projections didn't take into account the potential for people without children in MCPS to sell their houses to people with children in MCPS.

In fiscal year 2011, for the addition, they projected a 2015-2016 enrollment of 515. Actual 2015-2016 enrollment was 556. The capacity of the school, with the addition, is 577. I'm not seeing anything here that's worth getting hyperbolic about. Perhaps you are aware of different numbers?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Be careful. They make the same arguments now. Families don't live in apartments! Developers don't need to fund schools! Millennials won't have many kids!

"They" who? Who is actually saying that families don't live in apartments, developers don't need to fund schools, and millennials won't have many kids? (By the way, do you have any data on how many kids millennials are having?) I follow planning in Montgomery County pretty closely, and I have never actually heard or read anybody official saying any of those things, though I have heard and read many assertions that they do.

Look at the case of Bethesda Elementary School--it was overcrowded before the addition was finished. Because the projections used didn't take into the account the potential for families living in new apartments/condos nearby.

Or because the projections didn't take into account the potential for people without children in MCPS to sell their houses to people with children in MCPS.

In fiscal year 2011, for the addition, they projected a 2015-2016 enrollment of 515. Actual 2015-2016 enrollment was 556. The capacity of the school, with the addition, is 577. I'm not seeing anything here that's worth getting hyperbolic about. Perhaps you are aware of different numbers?

Yes, we're aware that kids were sitting in the aisles in school buses when school started because of their piss-poor planning. BETV was shuttered and the room used for instruction. Look at BCC - gorgeous old growth trees cut down to make way for trailers and more construction. The actual numbers in attendance at BE is over 600. Those forecasts show zero growth despite all the development going on. It is crazy, but it allows the developers to continue without paying impact fees - so we get to pay more in tax!

[Anonymous]

My husband and I make 250k combined so we wouldn't get vouchers...but I don't understand the logic for opposing them. I think they'd make the system better. If a private can charge 10k and get a better result than a public that charges the taxpayer 20k.. why not?

Forget for a minute kids with serious disabilities. If the child's only issue is a behavioral one...they need consequences..Though public schools are a "right" hundreds of years ago they were still considered a privilege..people had to farm etc... and students could be expelled.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My husband and I make 250k combined so we wouldn't get vouchers...but I don't understand the logic for opposing them. I think they'd make the system better. If a private can charge 10k and get a better result than a public that charges the taxpayer 20k.. why not?

Forget for a minute kids with serious disabilities. If the child's only issue is a behavioral one...they need consequences..Though public schools are a "right" hundreds of years ago they were still considered a privilege..people had to farm etc... and students could be expelled.

But in fact, private schools cannot educate everybody for $10,000 per pupil and get a better result than a public school system that educates everybody for an average cost of $20,000 per pupil. In part because of the kids with serious disabilities whom you're telling us to forget.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My husband and I make 250k combined so we wouldn't get vouchers...but I don't understand the logic for opposing them. I think they'd make the system better. If a private can charge 10k and get a better result than a public that charges the taxpayer 20k.. why not?

Forget for a minute kids with serious disabilities. If the child's only issue is a behavioral one...they need consequences..Though public schools are a "right" hundreds of years ago they were still considered a privilege..people had to farm etc... and students could be expelled.

Because this program is already existence, and 78% of the subsidies have been going to people who already have their kids in private school. Why is that a good thing to subsidize the choices parents would be making with or without government intervention?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My husband and I make 250k combined so we wouldn't get vouchers...but I don't understand the logic for opposing them. I think they'd make the system better. If a private can charge 10k and get a better result than a public that charges the taxpayer 20k.. why not?

Forget for a minute kids with serious disabilities. If the child's only issue is a behavioral one...they need consequences..Though public schools are a "right" hundreds of years ago they were still considered a privilege..people had to farm etc... and students could be expelled.

DA FUQ??!!
How about we forget ur kids ??
So just expel all kids with behavioral issues?!
Forget that many are being sbused, neglected, underserved!!
I truly hate the culture of thinking that certain groups of people are disposable, if they don't meet ur criteria, just 'forget them', dump them.
May God not forget you and have mercy on ur soul!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My husband and I make 250k combined so we wouldn't get vouchers...but I don't understand the logic for opposing them. I think they'd make the system better. If a private can charge 10k and get a better result than a public that charges the taxpayer 20k.. why not?

Forget for a minute kids with serious disabilities. If the child's only issue is a behavioral one...they need consequences..Though public schools are a "right" hundreds of years ago they were still considered a privilege..people had to farm etc... and students could be expelled.

But in fact, private schools cannot educate everybody for $10,000 per pupil and get a better result than a public school system that educates everybody for an average cost of $20,000 per pupil. In part because of the kids with serious disabilities whom you're telling us to forget.

I understand that disabled kids would cost more...you are twisting my words.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My husband and I make 250k combined so we wouldn't get vouchers...but I don't understand the logic for opposing them. I think they'd make the system better. If a private can charge 10k and get a better result than a public that charges the taxpayer 20k.. why not?

Forget for a minute kids with serious disabilities. If the child's only issue is a behavioral one...they need consequences..Though public schools are a "right" hundreds of years ago they were still considered a privilege..people had to farm etc... and students could be expelled.

Because this program is already existence, and 78% of the subsidies have been going to people who already have their kids in private school. Why is that a good thing to subsidize the choices parents would be making with or without government intervention?

Where does this 78 percent number come from? Neither you nor I know. I have a feeling if people had real choices they would be leaving the public schools in mass.