Montgomery County board of education fraud on students and parents

[Anonymous]

When these posts devolve into Angry Teacher and some other PP talking about how everybody's a racist and classist, it's clear that the thread has outlived its usefulness. That's just something incendiary to toss out to prohibit discussion that doesn't follow your agenda.

By the way, Angry Teacher, aren't MCPS teacher paid better than any other DC metro school districts? And how do you compare to salaries in Frederick County?

http://fcps.schoolwires.com/15291095112233603/lib/15291095112233603/Tch_Scale_Word_2010-11.pdf

Please note that moving from a 10 month employee to a 12 month employee means your salary increases by 16%. I realize you object to working all year long, you made that clear in many of your posts. Still, you need to understand, AT, that most of the world is expecting to work all year if they want to get paid a full annual salary. Stop feeling so sorry for yourself, and please, please, get out of the teaching profession. Your attitude can't be conducive to learning for your kids.

[Anonymous]

Why do people think that all teachers WANT to work and earn 16% less? This is just the way it is, and not the reason why teachers teach.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why do people think that all teachers WANT to work and earn 16% less? This is just the way it is, and not the reason why teachers teach.

Again, if you're going to compare salaries to people outside your profession, you have to annualize the amounts. You can't compare what you get paid for working less than 10 months out of the year (which also includes a week of winter break, a week of spring break, and all Federal holidays which NOBODY in private industry gets so really it's more like working 9 months a year) to what people make for working all year round. If I reduce my salary by 16% I'm not looking too far off from a teacher's pay and I work ALOT more hours. Just saying.

[Anonymous]

People love to compare education to the "real world" of corporate, for profit capitalism. Since when does any company provide the same level of services at reduced price?

Teachers salaries have been reduced for the last three years. Teachers in Maryland are going to be required to pay more towards their pensions, which on the outside is not a terrible thing, but in reality the extra pay is going into the general fund, and not the pension fund (a teacher tax, if you will) in a shell game played by the legislature. More money out of their pockets.

All the while class sizes increase due to the inability to hire more teachers. This creates more work for already an demoralized teaching force. This situation will effect students greatly. If a teacher has to take on a second/third job to make ends meet, so be it. We all do what we have to to support our families. No complaints here. But, when the quality of education begins to suffer for the children because the teacher does not have the "extra" time to devote to planning, grading, and writing recommendations, the consumers tend to get pissy.

Trust me, all that a teacher does cannot be done in the 8 hours of the school day. Now before someone spouts off about how professionals put in the time to get the job done no matter how long it takes, teachers are not paid, nor treated as professionals trusted to get the job done (vicious cycle of demoralization and demonization). The smart teachers who can, will leave. We (those who cannot afford private education for their children) will be left with the detritus.

So, no, not increasing the teachers' health insurance will not reduce class size. But when all things are considered, the quality of education for our children is at risk because it is not perceived as a priority in maintaining a healthy democracy.

How many professional sports teams have had to reduce the obscene salaries of the players? How many CEOs have not made millions even as they hold out their hand for government bailouts? Our priorities are messed up.

There should be nothing more important than educating our children to be able to think critically and identify and rectify the injustices that currently exist. Keeping the populace ignorant only benefits those who would like to tell you what and how to think. You can choose from a plethora of religions, corporations, political parties, and pundits that fit the description.

Anonymous wrote:I fail to see how not increasing the teachers' contributions to their health insurance reduces class size? Angry Teacher, can you explain that to me? As I understand it, having a job is better than not having a job, and I'd expect there to be a line of teachers waiting to take the job of someone who "leaves the profession" because the insurance premiums went up. I know of two such teachers who are biding time for a permanent position substituting here and there.

I actually support higher teacher salaries and less administration and spending on frills, but that doesn't mean that anyone can ignore economic realities that are affecting most all of us, including the fact that my fed insurance premiums are going up, but my income is not.

I do have a dog in this fight because my spouse has gone back to school to become a teacher - a long time dream. I would like to see higher salaries and more teachers, but having been out there in the fight, we know the realities that have existed since 2008. And I have a child just entering the MoCo system in a newly renovated but already overcrowded school.

[AngryTeacher]

This is the best you can do?

I'm shocked.

Anonymous wrote:

And my school is definitely not on the high-performing list.

I'm shocked.

[Anonymous]

if you're going to compare salaries to people outside your profession, you have to annualize the amounts. You can't compare what you get paid for working less than 10 months out of the year ... to what people make for working all year round.

very much agree.

[Anonymous]

I wonder if MCPS will account for their self-insurance fund on their financial statement this year (for the first time ever). Transparency would be so refreshing. Otherwise, I'll assume they want to keep it as their own personal slush fund.

[AngryTeacher]

Anonymous wrote:When these posts devolve into Angry Teacher and some other PP talking about how everybody's a racist and classist, it's clear that the thread has outlived its usefulness. That's just something incendiary to toss out to prohibit discussion that doesn't follow your agenda.

By the way, Angry Teacher, aren't MCPS teacher paid better than any other DC metro school districts? And how do you compare to salaries in Frederick County?

http://fcps.schoolwires.com/15291095112233603/lib/15291095112233603/Tch_Scale_Word_2010-11.pdf

Please note that moving from a 10 month employee to a 12 month employee means your salary increases by 16%. I realize you object to working all year long, you made that clear in many of your posts. Still, you need to understand, AT, that most of the world is expecting to work all year if they want to get paid a full annual salary. Stop feeling so sorry for yourself, and please, please, get out of the teaching profession. Your attitude can't be conducive to learning for your kids.

Here is the exact salary conversion from a 10-month scale to a 12-month scale: " The salary for 12-month employees will be equal to 117.5% of the salary for which employees would qualify if employed in 10-month positions." Keep in mind that there are FEW 12-month positions available - especially with budget cuts. So if you think this is an easy jump, you're sadly mistaken.

Where have I stated that I object to working all year long? Show me the evidence; I'll be waiting. It never bothered me to work 12 months. I had another career before I became a teacher. Finally, I do not feel sorry for myself and I have no intentions of leaving this profession. I received nothing but praise from the four principals for whom I've worked and from my director in central office (yes, another 12-month position but in education).

You sound jealous, PP. As is often told to us (teachers), it was, after all, YOUR choice to do what you do.

[AngryTeacher]

Anonymous wrote:I wonder if MCPS will account for their self-insurance fund on their financial statement this year (for the first time ever). Transparency would be so refreshing. Otherwise, I'll assume they want to keep it as their own personal slush fund.

an obvious Parents' Coalition fan!

[Anonymous]

AngryTeacher wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder if MCPS will account for their self-insurance fund on their financial statement this year (for the first time ever). Transparency would be so refreshing. Otherwise, I'll assume they want to keep it as their own personal slush fund.

an obvious Parents' Coalition fan!

Nope. Try again. Had never heard of it until someone on here called me Janice.

But it would be nice if you comment on this fact (lack of disclosure) that you at least try to answer substantively.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

AngryTeacher wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder if MCPS will account for their self-insurance fund on their financial statement this year (for the first time ever). Transparency would be so refreshing. Otherwise, I'll assume they want to keep it as their own personal slush fund.

an obvious Parents' Coalition fan!

Nope. Try again. Had never heard of it until someone on here called me Janice.

But it would be nice if you comment on this fact (lack of disclosure) that you at least try to answer substantively.

http://parentscoalitionmc.blogspot.com/

[AngryTeacher]

http://www.gazette.net/article/20110615/NEWS/706159785/1022/1022/leggett-montgomery-school-system-divulged-health-care-surplus-in&template=gazette

"Ervin said she also plans to speak with County Executive Isiah Leggett (D) to ask when he knew about the extra money. Leggett first learned the school system might not need to spend as much on health care benefits in April, he said, adding no specific amount of money was mentioned."

So Leggett knew in April, although he claims he didn't know the exact amount. Barclay sent his letter to Ervin (published on the board's webpage), reminding her of their discussion in April when he disclosed about $14m (at that time) in savings.

I'd say the board is winning this one.
*******

Anonymous wrote:

AngryTeacher wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder if MCPS will account for their self-insurance fund on their financial statement this year (for the first time ever). Transparency would be so refreshing. Otherwise, I'll assume they want to keep it as their own personal slush fund.

an obvious Parents' Coalition fan!

Nope. Try again. Had never heard of it until someone on here called me Janice.

But it would be nice if you comment on this fact (lack of disclosure) that you at least try to answer substantively.

[Anonymous]

AngryTeacher wrote:http://www.gazette.net/article/20110615/NEWS/706159785/1022/1022/leggett-montgomery-school-system-divulged-health-care-surplus-in&template=gazette

"Ervin said she also plans to speak with County Executive Isiah Leggett (D) to ask when he knew about the extra money. Leggett first learned the school system might not need to spend as much on health care benefits in April, he said, adding no specific amount of money was mentioned."

So Leggett knew in April, although he claims he didn't know the exact amount. Barclay sent his letter to Ervin (published on the board's webpage), reminding her of their discussion in April when he disclosed about $14m (at that time) in savings.

I'd say the board is winning this one.
*******

So just because Legett knew, doesn't mean the CC knew. They say they didn't know. Is there some sort of public financial reporting available to confirm when this information was public or is this all part of private meetings between these parties.

Second, let's say the BOE revealed the savings in April. Then, there is a budget compromise that came out in May maybe. That seems like a last minute find, but it is disclosed in some private meetings with Leggett and CC nonetheless. Meanwhile, the CC took position all year that future cuts should not impact the classroom and that they wanted the MCPS employee benefits to be cut back to the same level of benefits as county employees instead. The budget then goes through with some benefit cuts and some classroom cuts (media specialists and reading teachers). After the budget is announced, the BOE then announces that they are going to not even split the difference with the new savings. Instead, all the savings will go to restore benefits rather than cutting the classroom resources. That is my current understanding. Is this understanding reasonable or am I missing some key information. I don't have all the details at my fingertips, so i am open to new information. If you accept this story, then I think the BOE does not seem to be acting in good faith. They should at least split the difference with the CC on this new found money.

As an aside, I can't believe BOE would cut reading specialists. If MCPS should put money anywhere, it should be reading, writing, and math. They should get rid of sports, music, drama, admin, TV shows on public access tv and anything else before touching one of the core subjects. This is another reason we need a new BOE. It just seems like a political ploy to get parents to support increased revenues to the school system.

[Anonymous]

I second that the BOE should be spending every bit of attention (especially the precious dollars) on stemming the deterioration of the standards in core subjects in MCPS - spend this money on improving core academics, highlighting the waste of money on TV tutoring. A lot of parents are spending a lot of money on tutors for core subjects like Math, Sciences and Reading and Writing, which goes to show you how our county is doing with our kids education.

BoE - get in line with us, the public or GET OUT!! We are more than happy to take back out tax dollars and spend it on private schools or hire a new BoE, non-Angry teachers and others who want to be here for our kids. Your days are numbered if you dont change your ways.

Anonymous wrote:
*******

So just because Legett knew, doesn't mean the CC knew. They say they didn't know. Is there some sort of public financial reporting available to confirm when this information was public or is this all part of private meetings between these parties.

Second, let's say the BOE revealed the savings in April. Then, there is a budget compromise that came out in May maybe. That seems like a last minute find, but it is disclosed in some private meetings with Leggett and CC nonetheless. Meanwhile, the CC took position all year that future cuts should not impact the classroom and that they wanted the MCPS employee benefits to be cut back to the same level of benefits as county employees instead. The budget then goes through with some benefit cuts and some classroom cuts (media specialists and reading teachers). After the budget is announced, the BOE then announces that they are going to not even split the difference with the new savings. Instead, all the savings will go to restore benefits rather than cutting the classroom resources. That is my current understanding. Is this understanding reasonable or am I missing some key information. I don't have all the details at my fingertips, so i am open to new information. If you accept this story, then I think the BOE does not seem to be acting in good faith. They should at least split the difference with the CC on this new found money.

As an aside, I can't believe BOE would cut reading specialists. If MCPS should put money anywhere, it should be reading, writing, and math. They should get rid of sports, music, drama, admin, TV shows on public access tv and anything else before touching one of the core subjects. This is another reason we need a new BOE. It just seems like a political ploy to get parents to support increased revenues to the school system.

[Anonymous]

AngryTeacher wrote:This is the best you can do?

I'm shocked.

Anonymous wrote:

And my school is definitely not on the high-performing list.

I'm shocked.

Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.