Anonymous wrote:As a higher income earner, I pay more county taxes. Those tax dollars are taken by the county to fund schools outside of my town. So, I've already done my part in helping out the poorer citizens of this county. If I should choose to contribute some more money to my local school, why shouldn't I be allowed to.
Anonymous wrote: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 wrote:Anonymous wrote:But as a PP mentioned, Arlington and Falls Church have separate small school districts. It is not written in stone that school districts need to be organized along huge-county lines. Bethesda/Potomac do not benefit from being a part of MoCo.
This is true but the other areas benefit greatly from Bethesda/Potomac being part of the county.
What does Bethesda/Potomac get from being part of the county?
Anonymous wrote:As a higher income earner, I pay more county taxes. Those tax dollars are taken by the county to fund schools outside of my town. So, I've already done my part in helping out the poorer citizens of this county. If I should choose to contribute some more money to my local school, why shouldn't I be allowed to.
Anonymous wrote:As a higher income earner, I pay more county taxes. Those tax dollars are taken by the county to fund schools outside of my town. So, I've already done my part in helping out the poorer citizens of this county. If I should choose to contribute some more money to my local school, why shouldn't I be allowed to.
Anonymous wrote:As a higher income earner, I pay more county taxes. Those tax dollars are taken by the county to fund schools outside of my town. So, I've already done my part in helping out the poorer citizens of this county. If I should choose to contribute some more money to my local school, why shouldn't I be allowed to.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:But as a PP mentioned, Arlington and Falls Church have separate small school districts. It is not written in stone that school districts need to be organized along huge-county lines. Bethesda/Potomac do not benefit from being a part of MoCo.
This is true but the other areas benefit greatly from Bethesda/Potomac being part of the county.
What does Bethesda/Potomac get from being part of the county?
Anonymous wrote:But as a PP mentioned, Arlington and Falls Church have separate small school districts. It is not written in stone that school districts need to be organized along huge-county lines. Bethesda/Potomac do not benefit from being a part of MoCo.
This is true but the other areas benefit greatly from Bethesda/Potomac being part of the county.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I just saw this post from DCUM about the suggested contribution at Horace Mann Elementary (in NW DC) in DCPS.
"The Mann money goes to the second teacher in every classroom (PK - 5th), the extra science teacher, the extra PE teacher, the extra performing arts teacher, outdoor facilities. Other things here and there. We got the letter today asking for $1500 per child."
http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/15/327926.page
I would like to see MCPS allow parents to do something similar.
Because the county is so diverse socio-economically, it's a way to keep high-earners in MCPS. Otherwise they may get frustrated with this massive country-run operation. And it frees up money in the budget for the schools that need it.
Any chance this could actually happen? Or would people think it's not PC to support it? How did DCPS get this done?
The bolded is a fabrication. DCPS does not -- read that again, DOES. NOT. -- allow PTAs to hire a 2nd true teacher to teach in its classrooms (and thereby reduce the student-to-teacher ratio). Janney and Mann parents will try to tell you otherwise, as you see in the above post. It's not true.
What PTA funds can cover: aides. Aides (who are, yes, adults and helpful and may even be in school earning a degree someday) are not full-on, unionized curriculum-trained teachers who teach curriculum.
Don't take my word for it -- call Central Office at DCPS.
Another adult warm body in a classroom =/= "a teacher that effectively reduces class size."
Anonymous wrote:
But just to be clear, you're perfectly OK with giving poor people better versions of public goods than rich people. My kids' school gets less money per pupil than a school run by the same public system where the average income is lower.
I've only posted on this thread 2x and I don't actually support the idea of parent fundraising for extra teachers or aides. But don't justify opposition to the idea on the basis of equity. MCPS is already a totally inequitable system that is trying (and failing) to redress the increasing inequity in society.
But as a PP mentioned, Arlington and Falls Church have separate small school districts. It is not written in stone that school districts need to be organized along huge-county lines. Bethesda/Potomac do not benefit from being a part of MoCo.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I just saw this post from DCUM about the suggested contribution at Horace Mann Elementary (in NW DC) in DCPS.
"The Mann money goes to the second teacher in every classroom (PK - 5th), the extra science teacher, the extra PE teacher, the extra performing arts teacher, outdoor facilities. Other things here and there. We got the letter today asking for $1500 per child."
http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/15/327926.page
I would like to see MCPS allow parents to do something similar.
Because the county is so diverse socio-economically, it's a way to keep high-earners in MCPS. Otherwise they may get frustrated with this massive country-run operation. And it frees up money in the budget for the schools that need it.
Any chance this could actually happen? Or would people think it's not PC to support it? How did DCPS get this done?
The bolded is a fabrication. DCPS does not -- read that again, DOES. NOT. -- allow PTAs to hire a 2nd true teacher to teach in its classrooms (and thereby reduce the student-to-teacher ratio). Janney and Mann parents will try to tell you otherwise, as you see in the above post. It's not true.
What PTA funds can cover: aides. Aides (who are, yes, adults and helpful and may even be in school earning a degree someday) are not full-on, unionized curriculum-trained teachers who teach curriculum.
Don't take my word for it -- call Central Office at DCPS.
Another adult warm body in a classroom =/= "a teacher that effectively reduces class size."
Anonymous wrote:I just saw this post from DCUM about the suggested contribution at Horace Mann Elementary (in NW DC) in DCPS.
"The Mann money goes to the second teacher in every classroom (PK - 5th), the extra science teacher, the extra PE teacher, the extra performing arts teacher, outdoor facilities. Other things here and there. We got the letter today asking for $1500 per child."
http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/15/327926.page
I would like to see MCPS allow parents to do something similar.
Because the county is so diverse socio-economically, it's a way to keep high-earners in MCPS. Otherwise they may get frustrated with this massive country-run operation. And it frees up money in the budget for the schools that need it.
Any chance this could actually happen? Or would people think it's not PC to support it? How did DCPS get this done?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
No. Of course not. It will be to a different extent in different schools. Which is why I would give my left hand to decrease class sizes across the board for all schools (you have no idea how hard I've worked to try to make that happen). But it's better than *no aides at all* which is what we have now.
It's certainly better for your child. But it's worse for the public school system as a whole, and for society.
Why is it worse for the public system as a whole, or for society? Is it better for my kid to go to private school? Or for my kid to get a crappy educational foundation and then need more resources later on, that then come out of the public school system?
So short-sighted.
What I wish is that we could all band together and get smaller class sizes for all schools. But I have been so disappointed at the total lack of energy toward making that happen.
You are asking why it's bad for society when rich people can buy better versions of public goods than poor people.