Anonymous wrote:How much are the property taxes where you're from in Boston? I would bet they are higher than MCPS. I have lived in the Chicago suburbs and Pittsburgh suburbs and MoCo taxes are much less. I moved from an $800,000 house in MoCo where the taxes were just under $8,000. An $800,000 in my Pittsburgh suburb would have taxes well over $25,000. So I don't think MoCo homeowners pay a ton in taxes and even a slight increase could make a difference.
Anonymous wrote:
What about the MCPS teacher who sends her kids to the local parochial school? I would venture to say she is in it for the money...otherwise she would be teaching for less salary at the school where her kids are.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
The point with parochial schools (and many other Catholic privates), is that many of the teachers are there because they want to be...not because the benefits or the pay is good. Many of these teachers are committed to Catholic education, consider it to be more of a vocation vs a job, and have a passion for teaching our children. That is not to say public school teachers are not passionate, it is just a conviction that I see coming from them that I have not witnessed in a public school.
I assume that the teachers in MCPS are also there because they want to be there. Otherwise they wouldn't be there.
Also, I don't think that wanting to get paid for one's work is a sign of lesser commitment.
Clearly, you have missed my point. But I guess that is to be expected if you have never been involved in Catholic education.
Anonymous wrote:I agree with 15:30 - its downright shameful what they did with Beverly Farms. Huge new campus with an undercapacity school, while other schools are overcrowded and have kids in portables. And I don't have a dog in the fight - we live in the BCC district, but I have friends in that part of Potomac. They are all furious (except the BFES parents, who regularly gloat).
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
The point with parochial schools (and many other Catholic privates), is that many of the teachers are there because they want to be...not because the benefits or the pay is good. Many of these teachers are committed to Catholic education, consider it to be more of a vocation vs a job, and have a passion for teaching our children. That is not to say public school teachers are not passionate, it is just a conviction that I see coming from them that I have not witnessed in a public school.
I assume that the teachers in MCPS are also there because they want to be there. Otherwise they wouldn't be there.
Also, I don't think that wanting to get paid for one's work is a sign of lesser commitment.
What about the MCPS teacher who sends her kids to the local parochial school? I would venture to say she is in it for the money...otherwise she would be teaching for less salary at the school where her kids are.
Anonymous wrote:I agree with 15:30 - its downright shameful what they did with Beverly Farms. Huge new campus with an undercapacity school, while other schools are overcrowded and have kids in portables. And I don't have a dog in the fight - we live in the BCC district, but I have friends in that part of Potomac. They are all furious (except the BFES parents, who regularly gloat).
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
The point with parochial schools (and many other Catholic privates), is that many of the teachers are there because they want to be...not because the benefits or the pay is good. Many of these teachers are committed to Catholic education, consider it to be more of a vocation vs a job, and have a passion for teaching our children. That is not to say public school teachers are not passionate, it is just a conviction that I see coming from them that I have not witnessed in a public school.
I assume that the teachers in MCPS are also there because they want to be there. Otherwise they wouldn't be there.
Also, I don't think that wanting to get paid for one's work is a sign of lesser commitment.
Clearly, you have missed my point. But I guess that is to be expected if you have never been involved in Catholic education.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
The point with parochial schools (and many other Catholic privates), is that many of the teachers are there because they want to be...not because the benefits or the pay is good. Many of these teachers are committed to Catholic education, consider it to be more of a vocation vs a job, and have a passion for teaching our children. That is not to say public school teachers are not passionate, it is just a conviction that I see coming from them that I have not witnessed in a public school.
I assume that the teachers in MCPS are also there because they want to be there. Otherwise they wouldn't be there.
Also, I don't think that wanting to get paid for one's work is a sign of lesser commitment.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
The point with parochial schools (and many other Catholic privates), is that many of the teachers are there because they want to be...not because the benefits or the pay is good. Many of these teachers are committed to Catholic education, consider it to be more of a vocation vs a job, and have a passion for teaching our children. That is not to say public school teachers are not passionate, it is just a conviction that I see coming from them that I have not witnessed in a public school.
I assume that the teachers in MCPS are also there because they want to be there. Otherwise they wouldn't be there.
Also, I don't think that wanting to get paid for one's work is a sign of lesser commitment.
Anonymous wrote:
The point with parochial schools (and many other Catholic privates), is that many of the teachers are there because they want to be...not because the benefits or the pay is good. Many of these teachers are committed to Catholic education, consider it to be more of a vocation vs a job, and have a passion for teaching our children. That is not to say public school teachers are not passionate, it is just a conviction that I see coming from them that I have not witnessed in a public school.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:With so many kids from so many countries and so many ESOL and the FARMS increasing yearly, MCPS needs smaller classrooms. The parochial schools can get away with 25-30 kids because they all are from middle class American families. Most of those kids went to the parochial preschool and know the basics and behaviors of school.
MCPS kindergarten is a complete disaster. 27 kids and 10 of them ESOL. Some kids reading chapter books and others can't even read one word in English. Communication and culture differences. You couldn't pay me enough to teach there and I learned my lesson after sending one there. She learned nothing she hadn't learned in preschool. The curriculum is for the foreigners. Even in 1st grade, they are going over K word wall words. A, Am, Can, Go. I mean let's move on already and teach the kids that need to be taught. Can we not put all the ESOL kids in their own class with smaller ratios until they are fluent?
They are?
I wonder why that is?
They aren't all. My parochial was MOSTLY middle/upper-middle, but always a few kids on a free ride. More importantly though -- have you noticed that parochials that have class sizes like that have more than one teacher for that class? Um, yeah.
How much do parochial-school teachers get paid? How much do teacher aides for parochial schools get paid?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Our elementary school was built just a few years ago and already they are taking away rooms used for specials to convert to classrooms. Why would MCPS not anticipate that people will flock to a new school and thus build in extra classroom space? Seems like terrible planning.
When, exactly, did it open? And how many years before that was it designed? People in part are faulting MCPS for being unable to predict the future. And if MCPS overbuilt, people would scream "WASTE! BLOAT!" -- in fact, they do do that. DCUM regularly complains about the excess capacity at Beverly Farms.
Anonymous wrote:
That's flatly silly. Not finding statistical significance does not mean there's no causal effect there. And the fact that you DO see a significant relationship when the class sizes get lower (under 20) means there's good reason to believe that in fact you just aren't able to capture the effect because of confounding factors. So, yes it's true that we haven't PROVEN a difference between 25 and 24, but it's not at all true that there's no evidence of a negative relationship between class size and student success.