On the chrome book thing, I initially agreed with PP that the money should be spent on decreasing class size. But the numbers don't add up. A teacher probably costs at least $60,00 a year with roll-up (benefits, mandated employment taxes, etc). They get the chrome books at a super discount, so can probably buy at least 120 chrome books with that, and they will last more than a year. The technology allows the teachers to give advanced/remedial instruction where needed. For better or worse, I thin the future of education is probably one in which kids get a large amount of instruction and practice from technology, and teachers function as facilitators and provide additional assistance where needed, akin to the "Directress" model in the Montessori world.

But still, folks, call your county council member and state reps.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why aren't builders who want to build so badly in MC, given room and funds to build more schools. How is this not part of the bidding process? I have never understood how other parts of the country can do that but we can not.

What bidding process? They are building on land they own.

And, in fact, depending on the development, they are required to set aside land for a school, and/or pay road and school impact fees.

Occasionally set aside land but not build the school which is the problem. MCPS doesn't have the funds to build them. And in Clarksburg residents pay for the road fees, not the builders.

Why would you want the builders to build the school? That's MCPS's job.

In Clarksburg, there were originally going to be special tax districts to pay for the roads, but that never happened. The builders are paying for roads, and the county is paying for roads. (Although where do the builders get the money from, of course? From the people who buy the houses they build.)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why aren't builders who want to build so badly in MC, given room and funds to build more schools. How is this not part of the bidding process? I have never understood how other parts of the country can do that but we can not.

What bidding process? They are building on land they own.

And, in fact, depending on the development, they are required to set aside land for a school, and/or pay road and school impact fees.

Occasionally set aside land but not build the school which is the problem. MCPS doesn't have the funds to build them. And in Clarksburg residents pay for the road fees, not the builders.

Anonymous wrote:Why aren't builders who want to build so badly in MC, given room and funds to build more schools. How is this not part of the bidding process? I have never understood how other parts of the country can do that but we can not.

What bidding process? They are building on land they own.

And, in fact, depending on the development, they are required to set aside land for a school, and/or pay road and school impact fees.

Anonymous wrote:Why aren't builders who want to build so badly in MC, given room and funds to build more schools. How is this not part of the bidding process? I have never understood how other parts of the country can do that but we can not.

^giving not given

Why aren't builders who want to build so badly in MC, given room and funds to build more schools. How is this not part of the bidding process? I have never understood how other parts of the country can do that but we can not.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MCPS needs to do a better job of spending. I would much prefer more teachers to computers and smart boards and other gadgets in the classroom.

Teachers are operational funding, computers and smart boards are capital funding. Two different pots of money. It would not have been possible to use the money MCPS spent on Chromebooks for teachers.

They shouldn't be. Capital funds are for buildings. Not equipment. Equipment is generally operating funds. If they aren't, then there's a big problem right there.

Capital funds are for capital spending, which can include equipment.

I agree that there are other ways to cut funding, and that this shouldn't be politics--but the bottom line is that this is our reality and we need to advocate for our teachers, children, and schools. Please contact your state legislators and county council members. Urge them to fully fund our schools

Anonymous wrote:Everyone at our school is being told to push the County Council and State to give MCPS more money to stop the class sizes from growing. Our elementary school will lose three teachers which is terrible for any school where the students and parents know the long time teachers.

It seems unlikely that the state is going to keep giving MCPS more money.

Why do we not have the option to cut other parts of the MCPS budget? Class sizes and teachers are the most basic functions of a school system. MCPS has a ton of other programs, outreach activities, grew its PR team and legal teams, the curriculum team, and other funded areas beyond direct instructional staff. Why are these always off limits but the teachers are the first to go?

MCPS does this every year. It's part of the political battle with the Council over the Maintenance of Effort requirement. However, this year MCPS got screwed by the State. A short answer to your question is yes, MCPS can cut other items. But they politicize cuts that people care about in order to pressure Council. Council is hesitant to fund everything because that sets a new mandated minimum spending level, and because Council has extremely little say over how MCPS actually spends its money.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MCPS needs to do a better job of spending. I would much prefer more teachers to computers and smart boards and other gadgets in the classroom.

Teachers are operational funding, computers and smart boards are capital funding. Two different pots of money. It would not have been possible to use the money MCPS spent on Chromebooks for teachers.

They shouldn't be. Capital funds are for buildings. Not equipment. Equipment is generally operating funds. If they aren't, then there's a big problem right there.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MCPS needs to do a better job of spending. I would much prefer more teachers to computers and smart boards and other gadgets in the classroom.

Teachers are operational funding, computers and smart boards are capital funding. Two different pots of money. It would not have been possible to use the money MCPS spent on Chromebooks for teachers.

Those two budgets should be merged so MCPS increases their transparency. We should not have to buy smart boards if we'd rather have a teacher.

Anonymous wrote:What is an "instructional data analyst", and why do we need one?

IDAs organize the massive amounts of data gathered on students, including test scores. A good IDA helps teachers organize and analyze data from different sources. Student information that could help teachers better address the needs of students is spread across several databases. The IDAs make it more readily available to teachers in a useful format.