Mann and Janney PTAs called out in NYTs op-ed for perpetuating segregation in cities

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The entire point of the article is that city governments are not providing adequate infrastructure and services. That, of course, is true and is why NWDC parents started raising large sums of money to compensate in the first place. My oldest started DCPS in the early 2000s. It was nothing like it is now. Parents banded together out of sheer necessity.

Today, despite significantly improved functionality, the DC government still chronically underfunds schools. I would be more than happy if my taxes were raised and allocated reduce class size and provide better specials and wraparound services for those students in need.

The problem is that DC pays $25 billion to the federal government and gets only three billion back to its government.
Twenty five! Three! That’s negative $22 billion. Or, every DC taxpayer pays about $30,000 more to the federal government than the DC government gets back.

In contrast, in New York State, each taxpayer pays about $1,000 more to the feds than their governments get back. (Be careful about other numbers out there especially those from Heritage and Manhattan, the rightwing think tanks— other analyses twist the federal balance of payment calcs by including wages for federal jobs.)
Thus, as a DC taxpayer, $30k of your tax bill on average goes to subsidize other states. For NY, the next highest state, it’s $1,000. Kentucky GETS $3,000 or so.

DC is getting SCREWED by the feds.

Our schools don’t have enough money, despite the taxes we pay, because the federal government screws us.

[Anonymous]

And? We were a Janney family - I have absolute no problem with how the PTA and school managed things. A fair reporter would note how the PTA raised money and arranged donations for other schools in the city, and organized volunteer events to help the homeless, fed people, get new backpacks to needy kids, etc. Oh, and provided support to other schools to help them understand how to fund raise, manage their PTAs, apply for grants, etc.

OP sounds like a bitch asshole for posting this.

[Anonymous]

Staff and admin are stretched too thin in low income schools to manage any additional funding, even if they have good intentions.
I used to help organize files trips in a low income school because teachers just wouldn’t, they had enough on their hands. And the school secretary who worked with the district to arrange the buses was lazy and played favorites so some teachers didn’t want to even start.
Also some teachers flat out asked me not to apply for certain grants because of the reporting requirements that were too complicated.
Later my child transferred to a school with 6% farms and parents organized so many things there. They had to fundraise too because there was no title 1 money for them.
This was not in DC but I think it is universal.
Funding is not the problem.

[Anonymous]

one actual barrier to equity is school boundaries and underenrolled middle schools. PTAs are to my mind essential for any hope of UMC buying in to changed boundaries because they represent parent voices.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:one actual barrier to equity is school boundaries and underenrolled middle schools. PTAs are to my mind essential for any hope of UMC buying in to changed boundaries because they represent parent voices.

Lol, can't imagine how Palisades and Crestwood wouldnrespondto getting de-zoned.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Harshburger!

Even in cities where the rich and poor continue to live under the same local government, economic segregation saps political support for common, egalitarian infrastructure. Rich New Yorkers donate generously to beautify Central Park while resisting the taxation necessary to maintain parks in neighborhoods they never visit. In Washington, D.C., parents in wealthier neighborhoods contribute lavishly to parent-teacher organizations that provide extra money to public schools in their neighborhoods, but they do not vote for a similar level of funding for all city schools. Two schools in northwest Washington each raised more than half a million dollars in 2017, while several schools in southeast Washington don’t even have parent-teacher organizations. Last year, for the third time since 1970, the residents of Gwinnett County, Ga., which sits on the edge of Atlanta, refused to fund an expansion of the regional transit system into their suburban county.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/11/opinion/coronavirus-us-cities-inequality.html

NYT.

You can safely ignore.

[Anonymous]

DCPS teacher here. I think something more radical is needed to help struggling schools. Taking money from the rich PTA and giving it to others smells like bad government. DC governemnt needs to give more money to them, but to help hire more teachers and cut class size drastically to 10 or 12. Arguments saying size doesn't matter are total BS, ask any teacher. Teaching a class of 12 compared to 24 is massive. A teacher working closely with 12 can never attain that with 24 students. This is just one measure. There would need to be more in place for real change, growth, and academic success.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How do they know NW parents don’t vote for equal funding?? My kid goes to a dcps with a well funded PTA, and I would vote in additional funds for all of dcps in a second. The pta shaming is just a version of blaming “white women” for everything.

This is a little weird. I have a lot of admiration for the NYT editorial board, but their assertion here way oversimplifies the issue and the facts.

I've lived in D.C. for decades, and I've never seen a ballot for or against equal funding in D.C. schools. On this point, the NYT op-ed is based on a non-existent fact. It's like the blank piece in Scrabble: you can make a lot of impressive words with one of those! (but it's not a real word)

It is especially odd when you realize that a vote for literal equal funding would benefit the named schools and hurt others. So the article completely missed the point. There is a point to be made about PTA funding, but the way the article tries to frame is so factually incorrect that they miss the opportunity to actually address some real problems.

+1. Yes how ironic. Live EOTP and not WOTP BTW. Equal funding would actually help WOTP schools more. EOTP title 1 schools get much more money than WOTP from title 1 money, head start money up to this year, free meals, free ECE, etc...

I don’t grudge PTA’s that raise money for the school. It’s the parents money, not the city’s money.

People should realize that almost everywhere in the country, many of the things that WOTP PTA funds pay for is paid by the school district from the high taxes they collect from million dollar plus houses. In DC, WOTP schools get much less covered compared to their equivalent neighbirs in VA and MD.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:one actual barrier to equity is school boundaries and underenrolled middle schools. PTAs are to my mind essential for any hope of UMC buying in to changed boundaries because they represent parent voices.

Lol, can't imagine how Palisades and Crestwood wouldnrespondto getting de-zoned.

That worked out well in San Francisco What we really need is middle school magnets and, in the really really low performing schools, a “back to the basics” approach. Meaning, teaching 7th graders addition and subtraction, phonics, etc. Not PC but the truth.

[Anonymous]

If the EOTP schools are so lucky because they are getting more funding, then move there. You’ll last a week

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How do they know NW parents don’t vote for equal funding?? My kid goes to a dcps with a well funded PTA, and I would vote in additional funds for all of dcps in a second. The pta shaming is just a version of blaming “white women” for everything.

This is a little weird. I have a lot of admiration for the NYT editorial board, but their assertion here way oversimplifies the issue and the facts.

I've lived in D.C. for decades, and I've never seen a ballot for or against equal funding in D.C. schools. On this point, the NYT op-ed is based on a non-existent fact. It's like the blank piece in Scrabble: you can make a lot of impressive words with one of those! (but it's not a real word)

It is especially odd when you realize that a vote for literal equal funding would benefit the named schools and hurt others. So the article completely missed the point. There is a point to be made about PTA funding, but the way the article tries to frame is so factually incorrect that they miss the opportunity to actually address some real problems.

+1. Yes how ironic. Live EOTP and not WOTP BTW. Equal funding would actually help WOTP schools more. EOTP title 1 schools get much more money than WOTP from title 1 money, head start money up to this year, free meals, free ECE, etc...

I don’t grudge PTA’s that raise money for the school. It’s the parents money, not the city’s money.

People should realize that almost everywhere in the country, many of the things that WOTP PTA funds pay for is paid by the school district from the high taxes they collect from million dollar plus houses. In DC, WOTP schools get much less covered compared to their equivalent neighbirs in VA and MD.

This.

Same funding for all schools!

[Anonymous]

These lieeeeesss.
You may pay for essentials, like wipes however DCPS does give each school that just not enough. So in turn that IS a luxury. PTA will fund teachers that weren’t in the budget, paras, etc.
They fund those extras that can truly help make a school great. I call them extras but really every school deserves it.

One simple look at an LSAT budget can tell you what a great PTA can fund. I work at a title 1 school and I was thinking how nice it’d be to be a school that’s budget plan included ‘para funded by PTA or counselor funded by PTA’

That’s a wonderful resource.

I can’t blame NW PTAs fully for anything, however I can certainly say that equity is always a problem and really the focus needs to be the overall budget. The US has too long not invested in public schools. That’s something we should all be agreeing on.

We’ve already acknowledged these disparities but we haven’t done enough to help the city as a whole. Everyone only thinks about their neighborhood.

How about less ME and more WE?

-DCPS Teacher and Mom

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This does not take into account that schools EOTP have free PK3, more funding per child, free meals, and many other resources that are not given to WOTP schools. And no one is complaining about that.

The reality is that WOTP schools are overcrowded and the parents have to make up the difference between what DCPS provides and what is needed.

I'll give you some examples of what our PTA funds are used for in our WOTP school: field trip costs because DCPS charges us for the bus, smartboard repairs because they break and we need them repaired, classroom supplies for teachers so they don't have to spend their own money, etc.

As parents, we are expected to bring a huge box of supplies for the school at the beginning of the year because IT IS NOT COVERED BY THE DCPS BUDGET. Clorox wipes, paper towels, tissues, dry erase markers, pencils, crayons, paper, and so on.

We still have the same DCPS curriculum as everyone else. We have overcrowded classrooms. Not sure what folks are up in arms about.

Is this post a joke?? My kids are at a SE school, and our PTA pays for all of these same things? It's just that we barely have any field trips because we can only afford to fund so few, our smart boards remain broken, and the huge boxes of supplies are only bought by the families who can afford them, which is barely half of the class.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:When my kid went to a title 1 school EOTP, we never were asked to bring any school supplies at the start of school. It was provided for us.

And yes, my DS ate the free breakfast that was provided to all and the free lunch. Aftercare was free and dinner was free if needed. There was free PK-3 which saved a full year of preschool tuition.

There was a PTA but no one wanted to engage or fundraise. Nor could they because many families did not speak english and did not have extra money laying around.

Our DS got an excellent education and the teachers and resources were great. This was all without PTA money.

There are many schools that are not Title 1 and so don't have these kinds of funds.

[Anonymous]

There was only one paragraph about school budgets in this article and it barely references PTAs. The rest of the article was about highlighting the impact of economic segregation. Even though I rarely read opinion pieces lately, I liked the article and think that its time to start thinking about "radical" options. A teacher wrote that class-sizes should be reduced when you are working with at-risk students or a large population of ESL students. The article noted that the Netherlands gives a 25% bonus to schools per student whose parents didn't graduate from college. There have been many comments about Title I schools being flush with funds. These are not discretionary funds. It is used to employ additional school social workers, other service providers, and help children living with food insecurity. Head Start funding was (it was cancelled for next year) for coaches, parent workshops, and some educational toys. These funds do not support any extras and hardly give teachers/students all the resources that are needed. As someone who has worked at several Title I schools and my children are enrolled East of the Park at a school with no PTA, I really hope that we can develop a new mindset about how to provide the best education for all students because up to now it hasn't worked.