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.
A big part of the problem is that EVERYONE is too interested in what's on the other side of the fence. Is that district's teacher contract greener? Are our children getting as many programs as in that other district? Are we graduating out enough Ivy league candidates?
There is something to be taken from your example. We really need to concern ourselves with our immediate problems first, before trying to fix bigger ones.
This is a good breakdown scenario but here are my reactions, from a strictly practical basis, to each item:
Quote:
Originally Posted by nbres
1. Special Education Services - duplicative services could be consolidated. There could be greater specialization for particular disability areas becasue economies of scale would be created. This means every parent of a child in need of services will be able to get those services for their child.
Okay... "duplicative services could be consolidated" and "economies of scale" sounds like pure boardroomspeak to me. In plain English, please! If you are saying "not every school will offer speech therapy, and since less speech teachers will be required it will be cost the district less"... then say so. If that's the case, then if little Jimmy in Jericho who needs speech therapy is going to have to go to a different school if the Jericho elementary doesn't have it......who then decides what school Jimmy will then go to? His parents? The big district? What if the closest speech-therapy school is in Plainview and for other reasons Jimmy's parents don't want him to go there?
Quote:
2. Transportation there would be a single bus fleet serving the entire district. Also, the use of public transportation could be incorporated by giving students free metro cards. Parents of course could still drive their kids, or heaven forbid, make the kids walk to school.
METRO cards??????!!! This is Long Island, remember: The Land of Pathetic Public Transportation. Are the public buses supposed to change their routes in order to stop at each public school? The only thing that would work in that vein would be free TAXI vouchers (which would need to be tax-subsidized).
Quote:
3. High Schools - elimination of some and the expansion of others. Students could apply to any high school because the high schools could be more specialized. For example Herricks might have an exceptional science program or Syosset might have a great music program or Bellmore might have a great sports program.
In other words you'd make highschools operate on the same format as college admissions. First thing they'd have to do is charge an application fee for each one (why not, if it's a competitive format?). Then you'd have to make the entire thing competitive because in order to keep one school from needing a larger slice of the financial pie you'd have to cap the enrollment. If "local" (say Herricks) kids got preference over kids from out of Herricks, it would not be truly competitive, would it? But if local kids did not get preference, then what about the Herricks kids who did NOT get accepted because too many kids from other areas took their slots and pushed them out?
Quote:
4. Administration - elimination of many administrative positions. There would be one superintendent for the entire district and many supporting assistant superintendents.
I do fully support this idea and would take it a step further and say that each community district should be restricted to no more than ONE superintendent. Not one superintendent and two or more Assistant Superintendents.
Quote:
5. School Taxes - eliminate the school property tax and replace it with a county wide progressive income tax. Everyone pays what they can into the system and everyone gets the same spent on their children.
This idea I also support. However I think that there should still be some provision/reduction for seniors making less than, say, $50K/year. Something similar to the STAR program.
6. ELIMINATE, or at the least graduate it "LOWER" and progressively to NOTHING, for couples with NO children.
While you would have a tough time to completely eliminate it, it makes NO SENSE to "milk" for couples or individuals on a fixed income....fixed incomes OF ANY TYPE.
School taxes penalize couples and individuals who don't use schools, period.
Unfortunately, because the age demographics "say" the population is getting older, it would be impossible to completely eliminate the tax, to an eroding tax base population.
To tax people who do NOT have an intrinsic interest, in how the schools operate, and how their money is spent, is an unfair burden, especially in a high tax area, in general.
6. ELIMINATE, or at the least graduate it "LOWER" and progressively to NOTHING, for couples with NO children.
While you would have a tough time to completely eliminate it, it makes NO SENSE to "milk" for couples or individuals on a fixed income....fixed incomes OF ANY TYPE.
School taxes penalize couples and individuals who don't use schools, period.
Unfortunately, because the age demographics "say" the population is getting older, it would be impossible to completely eliminate the tax, to an eroding tax base population.
To tax people who do NOT have an intrinsic interest, in how the schools operate, and how their money is spent, is an unfair burden, especially in a high tax area, in general.
That's not gonna happen, what's the point of even having public schools then? You might as well just do away with them altogether and make them private at that point.
The whole point of public schools is that everyone pays whether we use them or not. Just like we all pay for police, fire, and Social Security. They're considered a public good. And those seniors on fixed incomes enjoyed the subsidy of others when their children were in school.
The whole point of public schools is that everyone pays whether we use them or not. Just like we all pay for police, fire, and Social Security. They're considered a public good. And those seniors on fixed incomes enjoyed the subsidy of others when their children were in school.
Somehow it makes sense, but it doesn't satisfy you when you are shelling out money, to be abused like it is.
And those seniors on fixed incomes enjoyed the subsidy of others when their children were in school.
You're assuming all, or even most, seniors had children; OR had children that went through the Long Island school system. Not necessarily so.
Neither my SO nor I ever had children. We both have another 5 years to go before we can qualify for the age-related STAR. Both of us have been homeowners on LI since we were in our early 30s... so we have BOTH been subsidizing other peoples' kids for 30 years at "full price" and are going to be doing so for another 5 years before getting any kind of a break.
SO's sister is in her late 50s and also never had children and has been a homeowner for over 20 years.
My brother had one child (my nephew) but he did not go through the LI public school system; he went to a private school. So my brother (now deceased) not only subsidized the education of other kids but paid twice (for them and his own).
So there you have four people within just one family group who did not "enjoy the subsidy of others".
My house has never burned down, but I still pay taxes to the fire department. Should I not have to pay them as much?
Depending on how much money your particular fire department wastes (remember the Newsday series not so long ago?) ... NO you should not have to pay them as much. And neither should anyone else in your district. I daresay that most fire district budgets are almost as bloated as the school district budgets are. Do you really think a fire dept NEEDS a $100,000 souped up car for competition in 'Summer Games'? Or every single bell and whistle on every new fire truck ordered? Sorry, I have ZERO sympathy for the fire departments who then have the gall to come around and ask for donations on top of everything else.
Sorry... I realize you were posing your question about usage. I just get really peeved over the whole LI fire dept debacle.
I don't think its fair to say that the people in Wyandanch don't prioritize education, it is more a $$$ more than issue than anything else IMHO. That is not to say that more $$ or a more even distribution of $$ will solve all of the problems, however its not exactly a coincidence that the worst performing districts on LI are the ones in the poorest areas.
Historically, throwing money at poor school districts does not increase achievement. If it worked, more places would do it!!! I doubt the money given to Roosevelt by the state will drastically increase student performance.
Prioritizing education increases achievement and unfortunately that is learned at home. Wyandanch does not have money trouble where they can't afford to educate its students. Many people there don't care about school. Graduation rates are a joke...it has nothing to do with funding. Short of paying the kids to attend, how will a few SMARTBOARDS really affect graduation rates. The Catholic schools operate on far lower funding than any public school and they have superior education results!!!!! I bet most private high schools recieve less tuition and no state aid when compared to Wyandanch. Based on your theory...Wyandanch should get better results than Chamindade or Sacred Heart..They don't because the issue isn't funding!!!
Consolidating schools will only create a mediocre district. Richer areas will be robbed by poorer areas...and nothing will change. If you don't believe me, read up on the issue. This is a socio-economic cultural issue.
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.
