Anonymous wrote:That sounds ludicrous. Giving $100k to your school would mean a couple of aides, and sharing out the other $100k would mean that every other school in the system gets approximately $1K, which buys no aides.

Anonymous wrote:

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 wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

IT's "rich parents don't get to fund additional teachers even if they put matching dollars into the coffers for additional teachers for other schools". So you're denying funds to all kids. Be accurate. And again, this IS allowed in DCPS. So, the question -- has it been bad for DCPS?

If rich parents have to fund additional teachers at every other school at the same staffing level they fund additional teachers at their schools, they will have to be very rich indeed.

Anonymous wrote:Here's a solution that has not been proposed yet. a countywide special tax specifically for the purpose of funding additional teachers in school, with a maintenance of effort requirement so it doesn't take away from current funding. I'd vote yes on the ballot initiative.
I'm curious though, about how the DC PS system works. I would think a full-time aide with roll-up (social security a d employment tax, benefits, etc) would run at least 50 or 60,000 a year. If each class is going to fund one, it seems like each family would have to kick in two or $3000. That seems to me unlikely.

Anonymous wrote:

IT's "rich parents don't get to fund additional teachers even if they put matching dollars into the coffers for additional teachers for other schools". So you're denying funds to all kids. Be accurate. And again, this IS allowed in DCPS. So, the question -- has it been bad for DCPS?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

What? What can I do to make my kids' school better NOW? Not in 10 years or when the political winds change, but while they're actually in school? I already volunteer at my kids' school. I already lobby for better funding. I make the phone calls and send the emails asking everybody else to. I work with my kid after school, teaching her the stuff she doesn't learn in school. I deal with her emotional traumas from misbehaviors that go unchecked because it's impossible to catch it all when there are that many kids in the classroom. I have a job and kids. I can't do it full time. I can't afford private, but I'm considering moving to another school district because I have one kid who actually needs some attention (the other's probably going to be fine regardless). Please, if there's something I can do to ameliorate the effects of 26 kids and one teacher in early elementary, tell me what it is. If I can do it, I certainly will.

You can

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

among other things.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

To some extent that's unavoidable, right? I mean, my school doesn't have the level of ESL or lack of parental resources that some schools have. That's an advantage. So I guess it's separate but equal unless we force all parents to donate their income to other families? Or tell the well-educated parents that they're not allowed to read to their kids?
IT seems so silly. What's too bad is that this is a very pro-education crowd who DO work to benefit the entire school system.
But you would really reject this WITH matching funds for other schools, on principle. SO you're turning down the benefit for ALL kids because we don't want the rich kids to have more teachers, even if it costs the system nothing AND the system gets more funding out of it. Wow.

Yes, I think that a rejection of "separate but equal" is a very important principle.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

When you get to this extreme, you have to admit, you're not thinking about what's best for the kids. You're turning down money that could benefit ALL kids, because you have some ideology that you think is more important than they are.
Why don't we take DCPS as an example and see if the bad effects have actually happened there? Has it been bad for DCPS as a whole for schools to be allowed to do this?

I don't think that "rich parents don't get to buy additional public-school teachers for their children" is an extreme position.

Anonymous wrote:

What? What can I do to make my kids' school better NOW? Not in 10 years or when the political winds change, but while they're actually in school? I already volunteer at my kids' school. I already lobby for better funding. I make the phone calls and send the emails asking everybody else to. I work with my kid after school, teaching her the stuff she doesn't learn in school. I deal with her emotional traumas from misbehaviors that go unchecked because it's impossible to catch it all when there are that many kids in the classroom. I have a job and kids. I can't do it full time. I can't afford private, but I'm considering moving to another school district because I have one kid who actually needs some attention (the other's probably going to be fine regardless). Please, if there's something I can do to ameliorate the effects of 26 kids and one teacher in early elementary, tell me what it is. If I can do it, I certainly will.

Anonymous wrote:

To some extent that's unavoidable, right? I mean, my school doesn't have the level of ESL or lack of parental resources that some schools have. That's an advantage. So I guess it's separate but equal unless we force all parents to donate their income to other families? Or tell the well-educated parents that they're not allowed to read to their kids?
IT seems so silly. What's too bad is that this is a very pro-education crowd who DO work to benefit the entire school system.
But you would really reject this WITH matching funds for other schools, on principle. SO you're turning down the benefit for ALL kids because we don't want the rich kids to have more teachers, even if it costs the system nothing AND the system gets more funding out of it. Wow.