Can we get MCPS to allow fundraising for staff positions?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes!!! Let's do this!!!

And then let's hire a chef who will only use locally sourced organic food in the cafeteria!!!

And let's make them wear uniforms!!!

And let's get UA to sponsor our athletic program and donate a turf field!!!

Oh, wait...this is starting to sound like private school.

A slippery slope argument? Yawn. Again, DCPS does this already.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Op
Pp has offered you a solution that is very parallel to what parents of kids in lower rates schools are told here all the time - just move. Just because it is not easy for you to do so does not mean it is not an alternative. Op also noted you could apply for a COSA if you believe the smaller class size is what is most important rather than the advantage that comes from having an overwhelmingly well off student body and parent group. These are both entirely reasonable suggestions.

It is not so much that I have a problem with your proposal of give $100k yo your school and the same to a fund (although I take pp's point that the same amount goes much less further when spread out across the general fund). It is that I think long term it will not work out this way. There was a thread last year suggesting some small amount of rich school PTA funds be shared with other schools given that some can raise obscene amounts of money and others struggle to pay for things like assemblies and field trip scholarships. On that long thread most from well off schools argued they should have to share nothing since the funds are voluntary. Forgive me if I doubt that over time $100K would keep coming into the General fund. Even if it did it would lessen the interest in he most politically connected areas to support broader funding for the schools since they could have bought their way out of the problem.

Here's another alternative, that people are ready and willing to do: give the parents at a school some autonomy to help their school. Shocking! Unconstitutional! But DCPS does it, so, I guess it isn't so shocking or unconstitutional.

[Anonymous]

I'm in Chevy Chase, and I do get the rationale behind not permitting private funding for additional teacher. I also believe that high SES schools get huge benefits from the income disparities - whether through the ridiculous amount of after-school enrichment or through fundraising that buys lots of other educational-related goodies for the schools (something tells me CCES has more Promethean boards than a school with mostly FARMS kids.)

But I think it's also a bit bogus to trash on the OP and others who are unhappy with class sizes in the high SES MCPS schools. I understand the rationale for keeping class sizes low in lower SES areas, but that doesn't mean it's appropriate to pack K classrooms to overflow levels in wealthier areas and say, oh screw those kids, their parents can supplement and they have more Promethean boards.

I don't know what the best or most appropriate formula is, and I'm not an MCPS hater either. But it doesn't seem as though the teacher imbalance is really making a dent in the achievement gap anyway.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm in Chevy Chase, and I do get the rationale behind not permitting private funding for additional teacher. I also believe that high SES schools get huge benefits from the income disparities - whether through the ridiculous amount of after-school enrichment or through fundraising that buys lots of other educational-related goodies for the schools (something tells me CCES has more Promethean boards than a school with mostly FARMS kids.)

But I think it's also a bit bogus to trash on the OP and others who are unhappy with class sizes in the high SES MCPS schools. I understand the rationale for keeping class sizes low in lower SES areas, but that doesn't mean it's appropriate to pack K classrooms to overflow levels in wealthier areas and say, oh screw those kids, their parents can supplement and they have more Promethean boards.
I don't know what the best or most appropriate formula is, and I'm not an MCPS hater either. But it doesn't seem as though the teacher imbalance is really making a dent in the achievement gap anyway.

Nobody has said this.

However, if it is a priority for parents in the wealthy schools for their children to be in smaller classes for K-3, those parents already have options:

1. move to a Title 1 or focus school
2. apply for a COSA to a Title 1 or focus school

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm in Chevy Chase, and I do get the rationale behind not permitting private funding for additional teacher. I also believe that high SES schools get huge benefits from the income disparities - whether through the ridiculous amount of after-school enrichment or through fundraising that buys lots of other educational-related goodies for the schools (something tells me CCES has more Promethean boards than a school with mostly FARMS kids.)

But I think it's also a bit bogus to trash on the OP and others who are unhappy with class sizes in the high SES MCPS schools. I understand the rationale for keeping class sizes low in lower SES areas, but that doesn't mean it's appropriate to pack K classrooms to overflow levels in wealthier areas and say, oh screw those kids, their parents can supplement and they have more Promethean boards.
I don't know what the best or most appropriate formula is, and I'm not an MCPS hater either. But it doesn't seem as though the teacher imbalance is really making a dent in the achievement gap anyway.

Nobody has said this.

However, if it is a priority for parents in the wealthy schools for their children to be in smaller classes for K-3, those parents already have options:

1. move to a Title 1 or focus school
2. apply for a COSA to a Title 1 or focus school

Well, if that's the only alternative you find acceptable, then you are saying it's appropriate to pack as many K kids as possible into wealthier schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am surprised this solution has not yet been suggested. Why not just leave and go to a private? If you have the money to donate, use it to attend a private. There are some great Catholic elementary schools that are not costly. We are only paying $7K a year. My DD is in 1st grade in a class of 27, with one teacher and one aide. Just a suggestion...it may not work for you if you are not up for a Christian education. And we don't have to deal with that horrible 2.0 curriculum. Best decision we ever made.

That ratio isn't great.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm in Chevy Chase, and I do get the rationale behind not permitting private funding for additional teacher. I also believe that high SES schools get huge benefits from the income disparities - whether through the ridiculous amount of after-school enrichment or through fundraising that buys lots of other educational-related goodies for the schools (something tells me CCES has more Promethean boards than a school with mostly FARMS kids.)

But I think it's also a bit bogus to trash on the OP and others who are unhappy with class sizes in the high SES MCPS schools. I understand the rationale for keeping class sizes low in lower SES areas, but that doesn't mean it's appropriate to pack K classrooms to overflow levels in wealthier areas and say, oh screw those kids, their parents can supplement and they have more Promethean boards.
I don't know what the best or most appropriate formula is, and I'm not an MCPS hater either. But it doesn't seem as though the teacher imbalance is really making a dent in the achievement gap anyway.

Nobody has said this.

However, if it is a priority for parents in the wealthy schools for their children to be in smaller classes for K-3, those parents already have options:

1. move to a Title 1 or focus school
2. apply for a COSA to a Title 1 or focus school

Well, if that's the only alternative you find acceptable, then you are saying it's appropriate to pack as many K kids as possible into wealthier schools.

No, I am saying that these parents actually do have choices. It's just that they don't like those choices.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes!!! Let's do this!!!

And then let's hire a chef who will only use locally sourced organic food in the cafeteria!!!

And let's make them wear uniforms!!!

And let's get UA to sponsor our athletic program and donate a turf field!!!

Oh, wait...this is starting to sound like private school.

A slippery slope argument? Yawn. Again, DCPS does this already.

Are we aspiring to model mcps on dcps??? That's hilarious, pp!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes!!! Let's do this!!!

And then let's hire a chef who will only use locally sourced organic food in the cafeteria!!!

And let's make them wear uniforms!!!

And let's get UA to sponsor our athletic program and donate a turf field!!!

Oh, wait...this is starting to sound like private school.

A slippery slope argument? Yawn. Again, DCPS does this already.

Are we aspiring to model mcps on dcps??? That's hilarious, pp!

Yes, all school systems should aspire to be like DCPS!

[Anonymous]

Dcps class sizes are small in an effort to better meet the needs of their low income and under- performing students. The anointed ones in Bethesda don't have the same issues.

Fwiw, there are plenty of mcps schools with reasonable class sizes (Olney, Brookeville). My kids' classes have ranged from 19-24.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am surprised this solution has not yet been suggested. Why not just leave and go to a private? If you have the money to donate, use it to attend a private. There are some great Catholic elementary schools that are not costly. We are only paying $7K a year. My DD is in 1st grade in a class of 27, with one teacher and one aide. Just a suggestion...it may not work for you if you are not up for a Christian education. And we don't have to deal with that horrible 2.0 curriculum. Best decision we ever made.

That ratio isn't great.

Better than MCPS ratio of one teacher for that many kids. AND, the kids are split up into three separate groups for reading and math. I'll take that over my top MCPS elementary any day.

[Anonymous]

First, make a petition to secede from MC to form Bechasetomac county.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm in Chevy Chase, and I do get the rationale behind not permitting private funding for additional teacher. I also believe that high SES schools get huge benefits from the income disparities - whether through the ridiculous amount of after-school enrichment or through fundraising that buys lots of other educational-related goodies for the schools (something tells me CCES has more Promethean boards than a school with mostly FARMS kids.)

But I think it's also a bit bogus to trash on the OP and others who are unhappy with class sizes in the high SES MCPS schools. I understand the rationale for keeping class sizes low in lower SES areas, but that doesn't mean it's appropriate to pack K classrooms to overflow levels in wealthier areas and say, oh screw those kids, their parents can supplement and they have more Promethean boards.
I don't know what the best or most appropriate formula is, and I'm not an MCPS hater either. But it doesn't seem as though the teacher imbalance is really making a dent in the achievement gap anyway.

Nobody has said this.

However, if it is a priority for parents in the wealthy schools for their children to be in smaller classes for K-3, those parents already have options:

1. move to a Title 1 or focus school
2. apply for a COSA to a Title 1 or focus school

Well, if that's the only alternative you find acceptable, then you are saying it's appropriate to pack as many K kids as possible into wealthier schools.

+1 Like OP, I live in Bethesda. I don't have quite the same level of concern about class size, and I am sympathetic to the principle of not allowing wealthier school clusters to buy more staff. But it does annoy me that, at least on DCUM, people love to rally around knocking the Bethesda schools down a peg. The kids are generally high-performing, so apparently they don't deserve any relief from some of the largest classrooms in the county. Bethesda is comparatively rich, so everyone seems to think it is OK that its schools are horribly overcrowded ("If you don't like it, move."). Or, Bethesda schools shouldn't be limited to people who live there, so let's bus more kids in or allow unmanaged development of high-density residences so more kids can benefit. I actually support more workforce housing in Bethesda, but it makes me bonkers that there's no money coming in to address the fact that Bethesda has some of the most overcrowded schools anywhere. Nobody thinks Bethesda needs any public resources, and yet the main things that are needed (expanded facilities, more staff) are the things that people in Bethesda are prohibited from contributing directly themselves.

But sure, let's just dump on OP and everyone else who lives in Bethesda.

[Anonymous]

Nobody thinks Bethesda needs any public resources,

Who says this? You have roads? Parks? Courts? Schools (as over crowded as many other areas)?

[Anonymous]

"Here's another alternative, that people are ready and willing to do: give the parents at a school some autonomy to help their school. Shocking! Unconstitutional! But DCPS does it, so, I guess it isn't so shocking or unconstitutional."

They have the autonomy to volunteer currently and it seems like many schools have ample volunteers in wealthy areas. Now if you happen to be at a school where the principal does not allow that in a classroom, that's an issue to take up with the principal since it's not a county-wide rule.

Also i find it pretty funny that people are pointing to DC schools as an example of "things working just fine".