Can we get MCPS to allow fundraising for staff positions?

[Anonymous]

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?

[Anonymous]

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.

[Anonymous]

Before I had finished reading this topic, I had guessed you were in Bethesda. By allowing the PTA or other fundraiser to pay for staff positions just creates more inequity in the schools. So the rich schools would be able to afford to get another staff position and the not so rich schools would not be able to afford it.

There is no chance of changing this. To be born or live in Bethesda already allows great privilege that other places do not have. If you are not getting what you want out our your Bethesda school, you can go private or homeschool.

[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.

In Focus and Title I schools there is no difference in class size for 3-5, so it is no different from rich to poor for those grades.

[Anonymous]

"Before I had finished reading this topic, I had guessed you were in Bethesda. By allowing the PTA or other fundraiser to pay for staff positions just creates more inequity in the schools. So the rich schools would be able to afford to get another staff position and the not so rich schools would not be able to afford it. "

+1

[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.

So move to a Title 1 school or MD focus school. Then your child's classmates will be less white, less wealthy and some will be speaking English for the first time. Hopefully with school breakfast and lunch your child's classmates will at least not be hungry.

[Anonymous]

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.

[Anonymous]

Correct, MCPS does not allow fundraising for staff positions.

https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/policy/pdf/cnd.pdf

I completely approve of this policy. Teachers/staff should be paid for out of the MCPS budget. You should not be able to buy your school more teachers/staff.

But don't worry, there are still lots of other things you can fundraise for, including:

-supporting activities of school-sponsored groups
-supporting activities that benefit the student body
-providing supplemental funds to help defray the costs of optional activities
-raising funds and collecting donations for charitable purposes
-providing supplemental materials or equipment
-providing supplemental support for staff to participate in development activities

[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.

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?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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.

[Anonymous]

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.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Before I had finished reading this topic, I had guessed you were in Bethesda. By allowing the PTA or other fundraiser to pay for staff positions just creates more inequity in the schools. So the rich schools would be able to afford to get another staff position and the not so rich schools would not be able to afford it.

There is no chance of changing this. To be born or live in Bethesda already allows great privilege that other places do not have. If you are not getting what you want out our your Bethesda school, you can go private or homeschool.

For some reason, DC sees this differently. Not sure why it's so unthinkable in Moco.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

So move to a Title 1 school or MD focus school. Then your child's classmates will be less white, less wealthy and some will be speaking English for the first time. Hopefully with school breakfast and lunch your child's classmates will at least not be hungry.

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?

[Anonymous]

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.

[Anonymous]

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.