Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I adore music and the arts. I adore them so much that I'm willing to work very, very hard (as is DH) so that my kids can participate. I don't believe that the public school system should be mandated to provide them. The PTA, in my opinion, is the perfect group to fund the 'extras' of education- art, music, athletics.
Signed,
Overtaxed, overburdened taxpayer
So basically you are saying that your kids are the only real concern and the model should be 'every man for himself'.
So basically you are saying that your kids are the only real concern and the model should be 'every man for himself'.
No I don't think so..the PTA is a group, not a single person.
With cuts to the schools the only way the extras will happen is via parent participation and fund raising if it comes down to that.
I think what mimimomx3 was saying is that she would work pretty hard in the PTA to get music/arts programs so her kids can participate in them.
"Every man for himself" would just be individuals paying for private lessons.
So basically you are saying that your kids are the only real concern and the model should be 'every man for himself'.
The only model that works is when people take individual responsibilty. That leads to accountability. PTAs are an excellent way to fund extra classes, or of course parents can pay for lessons. The 'extras' are not an entitlement. Otherwise, where does it end? Knitting is wonderful...so is chess...and FFA....and auto repair...and so on. There isn't an endless supply of money for schools, and there should be limits. One room school houses made the US a superpower; we've gotten too far away from the basics and are going broke doing so on top of it.
I adore music and the arts. I adore them so much that I'm willing to work very, very hard (as is DH) so that my kids can participate. I don't believe that the public school system should be mandated to provide them. The PTA, in my opinion, is the perfect group to fund the 'extras' of education- art, music, athletics.
Signed,
Overtaxed, overburdened taxpayer
To some extent, I understand your position, and feel your pain (as a fellow overburdened tax payer.)
However, in actual practice, the way what you are proposing works is that the rich communities with large, active PTA's are able to provide art, music, PE for their students. The schools on the poor side of town would not be able to have those things at all because many of those parents have to work 2-3 jobs to keep their family EATING. They don't have the luxury of allowing that kid to participate in track if it means that or the family having dinner that month. So no matter how much interest little Sarah shows in the trumpet, if it's between that and her little brother eating, guess what they're going to pick?
It increases the disparity between the haves and the have-nots, and I think that is absolutely the wrong message to teach with public education. Heck, it's already in place, but taking those things out of the schools completely would only make it more apparent.
You are aware that they already provide free and reduced price lunch, right? Should we take that away too and have those kids go hungry all day just because their parents "don't work hard enough" (translate: didn't have the same advantages you did growing up)?
No I don't think so..the PTA is a group, not a single person.
With cuts to the schools the only way the extras will happen is via parent participation and fund raising if it comes down to that.
I think what mimimomx3 was saying is that she would work pretty hard in the PTA to get music/arts programs so her kids can participate in them.
"Every man for himself" would just be individuals paying for private lessons.
Yes, I'm sure mimimomx3 would work very hard in the PTA to get those things for her kids. The problem comes in that SHE has the free time to do that. She has the extra income in her family to support those things. The family on the other side of town who has 2 adults working 4 jobs between them to try to get food on the table doesn't have that luxury. Forget about the single parents trying to make ends meet. Forget about the foster families. Forget about the recent immigrants. Their PTA doesn't get the huge donations mimimomx3's does when they put out a call for help.
What that model looks like is that if you go to a school on the wealthy side of town, your kid gets music, art, PE, everything money can buy. If you go to school on the poor side of town, you get nothing. It's already like that to some extent. The least we can do for those kids unlucky enough to be born into a family that isn't so well off is to try to even the playing field a LITTLE while in public school. No one is saying they get knitting, chess, auto shop, but they can't even have art and music? Not even the smallest amount of enrichment?
I don't deny that mimimomx3 works hard. I'm sure she does. But a lot of the poverty we see is due to people who just came to this country, people who grew up with a legacy of poverty in their own homes, people who didn't have the same opportunities as children--and this would only increase that factor. It's not an easy cycle to break and it's a shame when the "haves" can speak so blithely about elevating their own kids without a single care for the "have-nots."
Yes, I'm sure mimimomx3 would work very hard in the PTA to get those things for her kids. The problem comes in that SHE has the free time to do that. She has the extra income in her family to support those things. The family on the other side of town who has 2 adults working 4 jobs between them to try to get food on the table doesn't have that luxury. Forget about the single parents trying to make ends meet. Forget about the foster families. Forget about the recent immigrants. Their PTA doesn't get the huge donations mimimomx3's does when they put out a call for help.
What that model looks like is that if you go to a school on the wealthy side of town, your kid gets music, art, PE, everything money can buy. If you go to school on the poor side of town, you get nothing. It's already like that to some extent. The least we can do for those kids unlucky enough to be born into a family that isn't so well off is to try to even the playing field a LITTLE while in public school. No one is saying they get knitting, chess, auto shop, but they can't even have art and music? Not even the smallest amount of enrichment?
I don't deny that mimimomx3 works hard. I'm sure she does. But a lot of the poverty we see is due to people who just came to this country, people who grew up with a legacy of poverty in their own homes, people who didn't have the same opportunities as children--and this would only increase that factor. It's not an easy cycle to break and it's a shame when the "haves" can speak so blithely about elevating their own kids without a single care for the "have-nots."
This was my point. These are the ideas that contribute to a two class system, and contributes to crime, and a failing country. Do I like paying more in taxes? Of course not. Do I like a high standard of living that provides a high quality education for my kids and a thriving country? Um, yeah. You think the Trail or Lights and the closing of a few schools are sad? You just wait.
To some extent, I understand your position, and feel your pain (as a fellow overburdened tax payer.)
However, in actual practice, the way what you are proposing works is that the rich communities with large, active PTA's are able to provide art, music, PE for their students. The schools on the poor side of town would not be able to have those things at all because many of those parents have to work 2-3 jobs to keep their family EATING. They don't have the luxury of allowing that kid to participate in track if it means that or the family having dinner that month. So no matter how much interest little Sarah shows in the trumpet, if it's between that and her little brother eating, guess what they're going to pick?
It increases the disparity between the haves and the have-nots, and I think that is absolutely the wrong message to teach with public education. Heck, it's already in place, but taking those things out of the schools completely would only make it more apparent.
You are aware that they already provide free and reduced price lunch, right? Should we take that away too and have those kids go hungry all day just because their parents "don't work hard enough" (translate: didn't have the same advantages you did growing up)?
There is disparity throughout our city. Some people live on Lake Austin in million dollar homes and have vacation homes at the beach and the mountains. Other people crowd into a 1 bedroom apartment in the country or in East Austin. This is reality. Are you advocating a 1960s socialist style economy, like post WW2 Soviet Union (and we all know how well that worked)? The "American Dream" has always been study hard, work hard, and you can have that hilltop house. Handing out goodies does nothing but take away parents' responsibility. My suggestion is to focus like a laser beam on a high quality education that reinforces the basics- math, science, history, and English- and let parents and PTAs and other volunteer groups subsidize the rest. Fire nonperforming teachers. Demand that parents be accountable for kids' behavior. Tailor spending to direct classroom expenses (not football stadiums or performing art centers). One principal and one vice principal per campus (cut back administration). Sell the administration HQ on 5th street or terminate the lease and move to cheaper real estate. Private schools educate kids much better with much less- study the model.
Oh, it's just getting interesting. Just wait. The taxbase that has always supported the handouts is getting smaller.....and I'm not talking about the folks in Westlake and Pemberton. Their money is all nicely tied up in tax free bonds and trusts. I'm talking about the middle class folks sprinkled throughout Austin- those are the folks who are being fleeced.
There is disparity throughout our city. Some people live on Lake Austin in million dollar homes and have vacation homes at the beach and the mountains. Other people crowd into a 1 bedroom apartment in the country or in East Austin. This is reality. Are you advocating a 1960s socialist style economy, like post WW2 Soviet Union (and we all know how well that worked)? The "American Dream" has always been study hard, work hard, and you can have that hilltop house. Handing out goodies does nothing but take away parents' responsibility. My suggestion is to focus like a laser beam on a high quality education that reinforces the basics- math, science, history, and English- and let parents and PTAs and other volunteer groups subsidize the rest. Fire nonperforming teachers. Demand that parents be accountable for kids' behavior. Tailor spending to direct classroom expenses (not football stadiums or performing art centers). One principal and one vice principal per campus (cut back administration). Sell the administration HQ on 5th street or terminate the lease and move to cheaper real estate. Private schools educate kids much better with much less- study the model.
Well, we agree that they need to sell the property on 5th street. Private school can do more with less because they weed out the kids who need more resources. You can't go to private school unless you are rich enough to afford it, or deemed worthy of the few scholarships they give out. Public school is forced to take everyone, the kids no one wants, the kids who actually need to be taught. If you took a school that only got the "elite" (LASA, for example), they would outperform the others, but I think most people are intelligent enough to realize that those kids were going to be successful no matter what building you put them in.
To some extent, it's every man for himself, which you clearly advocate. But on some level, we also try to create an equal playing field for the poor, or at least give less fortunate families a chance. We have welfare, medicaid, free lunch for kids who would otherwise starve.
Public education should attempt to provide the same for every kid, not allow the richest kids to be given advantage after advantage while the poorer children have bare bones. Your argument is flawed because what it will mean is kids who go to an AISD school on the west side of town will have their choice of dozens of music and art classes, while a child who goes to an east Austin school will have nothing. During the school day, everyone within the school district should be given the same, every child in a classroom afforded the same opportunities. They have enough disparity to deal with once they go home.
You are very naive if you are suggesting their PTA's have the means to subsidize those programs... those families don't have the expendable funds that you do. They don't have mommies with nothing better to do than come up to the school to volunteer. They don't have daddies who can write a big fat check for $1,000 like it's nothing. When you worry about where your next meal will come from, the idea of donating to the wrapping paper sale is ludicrous.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
