Anonymous wrote:For the people who seem opposed to a PTA raising money for nice, even extravagant, features for their school, what would you prefer those parents do instead? Send their kid (and all of their financial resources) to private school? Send their kid to public but not give money to the school? What does that help? It’s obviously well-off parents that fund this sort of project, but it’s not like only the rich kids in the school benefit from any enrichments. It makes the school better for all the kids that go there.

(This is setting aside the question of whether these sorts of improvements should now be relocated, and at whose expense. Just seems like some people object to the idea of the lab in the first place.)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For the people who seem opposed to a PTA raising money for nice, even extravagant, features for their school, what would you prefer those parents do instead? Send their kid (and all of their financial resources) to private school? Send their kid to public but not give money to the school? What does that help? It’s obviously well-off parents that fund this sort of project, but it’s not like only the rich kids in the school benefit from any enrichments. It makes the school better for all the kids that go there.

(This is setting aside the question of whether these sorts of improvements should now be relocated, and at whose expense. Just seems like some people object to the idea of the lab in the first place.)

Spoken like a true libertarian and I see your point, but this country’s history of segregation has forced public school districts to take equality into account. I didn’t make the rules.

Take it into account, sure. I doubt equity considerations will make APS turn down funds for curriculum enrichment when offered. The policy cited above is just a district policy, and even it just requires APS to “consider” equity issues. It’s not a rule against big donations.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For the people who seem opposed to a PTA raising money for nice, even extravagant, features for their school, what would you prefer those parents do instead? Send their kid (and all of their financial resources) to private school? Send their kid to public but not give money to the school? What does that help? It’s obviously well-off parents that fund this sort of project, but it’s not like only the rich kids in the school benefit from any enrichments. It makes the school better for all the kids that go there.

(This is setting aside the question of whether these sorts of improvements should now be relocated, and at whose expense. Just seems like some people object to the idea of the lab in the first place.)

Spoken like a true libertarian and I see your point, but this country’s history of segregation has forced public school districts to take equality into account. I didn’t make the rules.

Anonymous wrote:Well, if you are going to redistribute my PTA donations, I simply won't donate as much. Title 1 schools do get lots of monetary advantages over UMC schools, they get extra teachers, programs, etc... They may not have fancy trinkets, but those programs are well funded already. The differences between UMC public schools and ED public schools is not really about the money, it is more cultural and parent education.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone know if that policy was in effect when the lab was built? It doesn’t seem like policy was followed since the school board didn’t vote on it. It seems like the principle didn’t follow protocol since she was aware of and assisted the fund raising efforts.

Wait, you think that lab cost $100k?

First off, much of the build costs would be part of any remodel — so you need to break that out from the total. Second they raised $50k at most. So no school board votes were needed.

uh- no they didn't http://give.livingtree.com/c/asfs-science-lab/backers

they raised closer to 200k

Anonymous wrote:For the people who seem opposed to a PTA raising money for nice, even extravagant, features for their school, what would you prefer those parents do instead? Send their kid (and all of their financial resources) to private school? Send their kid to public but not give money to the school? What does that help? It’s obviously well-off parents that fund this sort of project, but it’s not like only the rich kids in the school benefit from any enrichments. It makes the school better for all the kids that go there.

(This is setting aside the question of whether these sorts of improvements should now be relocated, and at whose expense. Just seems like some people object to the idea of the lab in the first place.)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For the people who seem opposed to a PTA raising money for nice, even extravagant, features for their school, what would you prefer those parents do instead? Send their kid (and all of their financial resources) to private school? Send their kid to public but not give money to the school? What does that help? It’s obviously well-off parents that fund this sort of project, but it’s not like only the rich kids in the school benefit from any enrichments. It makes the school better for all the kids that go there.

(This is setting aside the question of whether these sorts of improvements should now be relocated, and at whose expense. Just seems like some people object to the idea of the lab in the first place.)

How about give some money to the school’s with 70% poverty. Where kids are food insecure and don’t have coats. Just a thought.

Anonymous wrote:For the people who seem opposed to a PTA raising money for nice, even extravagant, features for their school, what would you prefer those parents do instead? Send their kid (and all of their financial resources) to private school? Send their kid to public but not give money to the school? What does that help? It’s obviously well-off parents that fund this sort of project, but it’s not like only the rich kids in the school benefit from any enrichments. It makes the school better for all the kids that go there.

(This is setting aside the question of whether these sorts of improvements should now be relocated, and at whose expense. Just seems like some people object to the idea of the lab in the first place.)

Anonymous wrote:We're proud to rededicate IS as the Kedron V. Simon Investigation Station. Special moment as we look to the future!

https://twitter.com/asfsonline/status/607305811619155969


2:59 PM - 6 Jun 2015

Anonymous wrote:Really important stuff here. So glad this is the focus.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone know if that policy was in effect when the lab was built? It doesn’t seem like policy was followed since the school board didn’t vote on it. It seems like the principle didn’t follow protocol since she was aware of and assisted the fund raising efforts.

Wait, you think that lab cost $100k?

First off, much of the build costs would be part of any remodel — so you need to break that out from the total. Second they raised $50k at most. So no school board votes were needed.

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone know if that policy was in effect when the lab was built? It doesn’t seem like policy was followed since the school board didn’t vote on it. It seems like the principle didn’t follow protocol since she was aware of and assisted the fund raising efforts.