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 don't think the US News rankings proves your point. Though a few schools in AZ excel, many - too many - are near the bottom of these rankings.
My guess is it proves kids in the high performing schools, in AZ or wherever, have parents who care/follow through with their kids education more than anything. Though perhaps the simple answer based on these AZ schools who excelled at these rankings is to use these schools as the model and duplicate their mode of operation throughout the state. I think again there's much more to it than that but I think it makes logical sense as perhaps a starting point.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ponderosa
Our public schools are badly underfunded. Our textbooks are several editions behind current. They are held together with duct tape and missing pages. Teachers buy their own supplies in many cases because the school does not have the money. The buses are dilapidated and prone to breakdowns. The maintenance costs eat ever increasing shares of the budget. Music is cut or gone, elective courses have been slashed. Don't even think about art classes. At the university level, the cost in AZ has doubled in just the last few years as the state cut funding to provide more tax relief to the businesses that never came. Kids graduating from college are thousands of dollars in debt these days.
I am willing to bet that when you were coming up, your parents provided good schools for you and your community supported those schools. I grew up in Wisconsin and we had new schools, new books, science labs with the latest in scientific equipment. My parents paid for it, my grandparents paid for it. Why is paying it forward, investing in our future, so hard for the boomer generation?
I looked at UofA and ASU and their instate tuition is about 10k a year and I think that's pretty much in-line of what is charged nationwide for a state university:
But yes, I agree....college isn't cheap, and in many cases, downright expensive and many kids coming out have lots of debt. Proper planning, savings by parents at an early age, savings by kids by via their jobs, work a little while going to college, and perhaps even getting scholarships are ways to help.
I'm younger than the boomer generation and have no problem funding anything if I feel the cost/benefit is there. Paying for quality often costs extra but not always and that's what I feel our state of public education is in throughout our country. I don't think paying for levels of administration that I feel does little/if anything to assist what goes on in the classroom. I think you'll find many states spend big $ on admin costs that gets lumped in the "educating cost per pupil" figure.
Here's an article from back in 2002 showing how this trend has been going on for a while, using MI as an example:
"Some parents have publicly questioned why the district is hiring more high-level administrators while cutting teaching positions. Mary Rose Forsyth, whose son attends a Detroit middle school, told The News, "Before they cut anything at the school level, they ought to do away with most administration," she said. "If we are in such a deep crisis, the cuts need to be made at the top. We could get along without them for a couple of years.""
"New evidence suggests that a growing percentage of public school funds are being spent on district administration rather than on teaching. According to Standard & Poor's, the private company hired by the state to analyze school data from Michigan public schools and public school academies, central administration costs have risen more than twice as fast as instructional expenses, including teacher salaries, over the past three years."
And when I give to a charity, I want to fund the cause, not levels of administrative costs that are out of line that don't go to the cause at hand. I think that's a good analogy of what I'm trying to make for our current state of education spending in many(all?) states on public education.
So my point comes back to be careful when one shouts out "spend more on education!". Well, in a sense, you may get exactly what you ask for......sort of/kind of. Throw in politics with "it's for the kids!" sales pitch mantra in the call to spend more on "education" that no parent, and well meaning I'm sure, but doesn't look deep enough to know where those $ are really going too and is that the direct path to educating students? Often the answer I think is no.
Welcome to the illusion.
So back to my view.....I'm all for funding a school system properly if the money is spent on just that....educating(ie decent teachers, equipment, well maintained buildings, etc), not spending on levels of pencil pushers and looking at what I feel is useless "per pupil spending" which to me is a marketing game.
This is where so many people get confused (or like to confuse) in this discussion...the problem isn't that we need to throw more money at the problem (the US is already at the top of the list on how much we spend per student). We need to hold administrators and school boards accountable for results with the money they are given. The difference from the time that you're describing and now is that today we have created an environment where school districts are places for people with little skill and ability to hang out and collect a paycheck and don't have to show results to keep their jobs. Administrators have little motivation to improve education results but have much motivation to bring in more dollars (to line their pockets) and secure their jobs.
The school could have new books, science labs, etc. but administrators think it is more important that the maintenance director get another new pickup truck, all the iphones for the staff get swapped for new ones, the staffs Mac comp
Computers all get replaced with the newest model and we invest in some technology that is far beyond the level of education we're currently providing so it will never get used and will be outdated by the time the students would be able to use it. Purchase 10 years of printer toner to spend "use it or lose it funds" where the printers will get replaced in a year or two making the excess toner useless to the new models and need to be thrown away. Teachers not given pay raises in 7 years (senior administrators got raises during this time frame) because of this waste which forces the good teachers to quit and find jobs elsewhere leaving the district with teachers that are not competitive elsewhere (bottom of the barrel) or brand new teachers with no experience. This is happening all over the state...it is not a funding problem, it is a mismanagement problem.
Go to a school board meeting sometime...you'll find that 99% of the meeting is discussing stuff that has nothing to do with educating children and 1% of the time may brush over the subject with promises to look into it further (normally the results of this further discussion is never discussed at a school board meeting). Better yet, go watch your child in class...most are given a "packet" and sit at their desk and work on the packet while the teacher sits at their desk and surfs the internet.
Of course there are some good teachers and administrators in the mix but the bad ones far outnumber the good ones. The list of teachers to avoid your child getting put with is MUCH longer than the short list of good teachers that everyone wants their child put with.
Just because someone doesn't agree with your viewpoint doesn't mean they are confused or trying to confuse others. Different viewpoints are just different, and not necessarily wrong.
Yes, we are or near the top of school expenditures as compared to other nations. Of couse, having been in some third world schools, I hope you'll admit that we don't want to be in the same category as schools in Southeast Asia or Africa, or parts of South America, or eastern Europe, or the Middle East. Maybe is the reason we are at such high levels of spending because of how much it costs to build a school (which is still basically cinder block construction) before the first teacher, student, or administrator walks in the door? Or because text books costs often exceed $50 per book? Or because schools need the kind of high technology that the students will be using when they get out in the work world? Or because parents want a school lunch program, a breakfast program, an after-school program (on top of regular clubs and activities), sports teams that compete with other schools in their respective states, a special education program that improves the life of every child (no matter how severe their handicap), a gifted/talented program for kids on the other end of the spectrum, transportation, and on and on and on.
It's funny, in NYS, Virginia, and Maryland, I never ran into many people that just hanged around and collected paychecks. Maybe you're just in an unusually lousy school district.
Administrators have no desire to improve school results? Then you haven't worked in a school since test scores became the be all and end all. And frankly, at the building level, other than PTA-type fundraisers, school administrators are usually given a budget in which to work. They don't go out and solicit more funds. And, even the little they do (again, as through PTAs) is a pitiful drop in the bucket financially.
If Arizona schools are as you describe them -- and perhaps they are -- it's because of Arizona, because schools in other places aren't in that pitiful shape.
How about we go back to the topic? Rather than only discussing school funding we should explore again how our political leaders make us look stupid in Arizona. Do we need 1-2 anti-abortion bills every year? Do we need to have religious discrimination here against Christian churches believing in same-sex marriage? How does this decimate our customer basis of prospective RE buyers and relocations, which after all is still the basis of our economy in AZ? How come that Arizona has only regained about 56% of jobs lost in the Great Recession vs. the national average of 99%? Why are we so far behind? Is there a connection with our AZ politics?
Just because someone doesn't agree with your viewpoint doesn't mean they are confused or trying to confuse others. Different viewpoints are just different, and not necessarily wrong.
Yes, we are or near the top of school expenditures as compared to other nations. Of couse, having been in some third world schools, I hope you'll admit that we don't want to be in the same category as schools in Southeast Asia or Africa, or parts of South America, or eastern Europe, or the Middle East. Maybe is the reason we are at such high levels of spending because of how much it costs to build a school (which is still basically cinder block construction) before the first teacher, student, or administrator walks in the door? Or because text books costs often exceed $50 per book? Or because schools need the kind of high technology that the students will be using when they get out in the work world? Or because parents want a school lunch program, a breakfast program, an after-school program (on top of regular clubs and activities), sports teams that compete with other schools in their respective states, a special education program that improves the life of every child (no matter how severe their handicap), a gifted/talented program for kids on the other end of the spectrum, transportation, and on and on and on.
It's funny, in NYS, Virginia, and Maryland, I never ran into many people that just hanged around and collected paychecks. Maybe you're just in an unusually lousy school district.
Administrators have no desire to improve school results? Then you haven't worked in a school since test scores became the be all and end all. And frankly, at the building level, other than PTA-type fundraisers, school administrators are usually given a budget in which to work. They don't go out and solicit more funds. And, even the little they do (again, as through PTAs) is a pitiful drop in the bucket financially.
If Arizona schools are as you describe them -- and perhaps they are -- it's because of Arizona, because schools in other places aren't in that pitiful shape.
When you're spending the most in the world per student and rank at the bottom in terms of results, then saying spending more money is the solution can only be described as confused or possibly some other less flattering terms I can think of. You're saying "building level", they don't make the decisions I'm talking about at the "building level", I'm talking about the administration at the districts and the school board.
We are at the top in comparison to other industrial nations, no one is talking about third world countries except you. The administration is certainly soliciting more federal funds and state funds to work with, that is a huge point of discussion at board meetings of how to generate more funding from government sources. They are constantly adding programs that offer little value to the overall education of the school population and benefit a small group to get more federal or state funding (you mentioned many of daycare programs programs I'm referring to that have no business being funded by taxpayer dollars). Then there is the hours of discussion on how to get more bond or override funds on local ballot measures. No one is talking about "PTA fundraisers".
"High Technology", another myth...kids in K-12 don't need "high technology that they will be using in the work world" yet that is spouted off at every board meeting when the IT director is making his/her pitch on why the district needs to spend a ton of money on some unneeded technology project. The kids can't read, write or perform basic arithmetic yet the district is worried about "high technology". Come on, let's get real here. The only technology I had in my K-12 education 30 years ago was one class on typing on a typewriter. I can run circles around my kids when it comes to technology and the basics of the education they should have received during their K-12 education. High School graduates are not going to work in "high tech fields" as those jobs require a college education. Let's concentrate on mastering the basics in K-12 and leave the "high technology" for higher education.
Test scores the "end all be all"...that is what the "packets" are that students are working on while the teacher surfs the internet. Packets that teach the test questions so they can pass the standardized tests without actually knowing the material.
We can keep throwing money at the problem and the problem will continue to get worse or we can start holding administrators accountable for real results and solve the problem for good. The MANY ununified school districts here makes the spending worse due to unneeded duplication as well as making oversight harder due to the sheer number of districts that need to be monitored. It would be much easier to hold districts accountable if there was a Phoenix Unified School District, a Goodyear/Avondale Unified School District, etc. instead of the nearly 60 school districts we have in Maricopa County alone.
How about we go back to the topic? Rather than only discussing school funding we should explore again how our political leaders make us look stupid in Arizona. Do we need 1-2 anti-abortion bills every year? Do we need to have religious discrimination here against Christian churches believing in same-sex marriage? How does this decimate our customer basis of prospective RE buyers and relocations, which after all is still the basis of our economy in AZ? How come that Arizona has only regained about 56% of jobs lost in the Great Recession vs. the national average of 99%? Why are we so far behind? Is there a connection with our AZ politics?
Please don't try and force this into a bash the right thread as it was starting to go there for a while. We have the same cast of characters that have to turn every thread into a "right wing nut job" or "bubba with a gun" thread instead of having an educated discussion on the topic.
We're perfectly on topic so let's not try and steer it in a direction you may be more comfortable with. The education funding is perfecly on "topic" as I'll quote from the OP below.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jukesgrrl
ASU economist Dennis Hoffman described the "vicious circle" our economy is now in:
-People won't move here until there are more high-paying jobs, -We can't have high-paying jobs until companies and investors are convinced we have well-qualified and trained workers,
-They won't find those people here until we have better public education,
-Our lawmakers de-fund public education because we have a bad economy.
Orr said Arizona is well-known nationwide as having a low per-pupil spending. That, and other educational issues, makes the state look bad in the eyes of American business.
Please don't try and force this into a bash the right thread as it was starting to go there for a while. We have the same cast of characters that have to turn every thread into a "right wing nut job" or "bubba with a gun" thread instead of having an educated discussion on the topic.
We're perfectly on topic so let's not try and steer it in a direction you may be more comfortable with. The education funding is perfecly on "topic" as I'll quote from the OP below.
It's hardly the only topic mentioned though. How would you feel like a moderate American weighing his choices when confronted with Arizona politics? And why are we so far behind in our job recovery compared with the rest of the country? How long do we want to continue on the path of "looking stupid" and "lacking job recovery"?
It's hardly the only topic mentioned though. How would you feel like a moderate American weighing his choices when confronted with Arizona politics? And why are we so far behind in our job recovery compared with the rest of the country? How long do we want to continue on the path of "looking stupid" and "lacking job recovery"?
I'm a "moderate American" and "weighed my choices" when deciding where to plant roots when I left the military, I could have picked anywhere in the country when I retired and the military would have moved me there for free. I picked Arizona because it was Arizona and represents many of the things that made America great in the past. Is it perfect, of course not, but there is at least room to attempt to make it better and isn't so far gone as are most of the places that so many people are running from (to Arizona and Texas, etc.).
I was trying to keep politics out of it but you keep mentioning "politics"...the liberal experiment has failed over and over and people are fleeing the liberal bastions for more conservative places. For the most part I'm a fiscal conservative and socially moderate and don't concern myself with many of the social issues that the religious right pushes. I am smart enough to realize that big government & throwing more money (money we don't have to begin with) at every situation isn't the answer to our problems (just causes bureaucrats and administrators to waste more money). Personal responsibility, accountability and working hard to do our best and teaching and enforcing these values in our children will overcome most of the problems that the left wants to throw more money at. We still have the ability to do that in Arizona, other parts of the country are way too far gone to even attempt this and unfortunately are going to drag everyone down with them.
Then we have Mike Orr and the other "economists" trying to tell use that we need to be attractive (make our state more like the state they are fleeing) to these people that are fleeing. I've lived in three states that were attractive to these people fleeing California and it was great for the Californians that moved there but sucked for all those that used to call the place home and had to leave because all the jobs were taken by Californians and they couldn't afford to live there any longer. In each of these places there wasn't some big job boom that came with the Californians, they just sucked up the existing jobs so now every car salesman, secretary, grocery clerk is formerly from California.
It's hardly the only topic mentioned though. How would you feel like a moderate American weighing his choices when confronted with Arizona politics? And why are we so far behind in our job recovery compared with the rest of the country? How long do we want to continue on the path of "looking stupid" and "lacking job recovery"?
We are so far behind because the jobs lost were disproportionately construction jobs. Just before the crash we had a bubble not only of homes being built, but jobs building them (and selling them, and decorating them etc, etc.) When the bubble burst those jobs went with it. We are not going to get them back unless the home building industry comes back and new home sales start reaching pre-recession levels. That is not going to happen overnight and it may never reach the levels we saw pre-bust. So there will be a slow recovery/expansion, at best, along with population growth.
We are so far behind because the jobs lost were disproportionately construction jobs. Just before the crash we had a bubble not only of homes being built, but jobs building them (and selling them, and decorating them etc, etc.) When the bubble burst those jobs went with it. We are not going to get them back unless the home building industry comes back and new home sales start reaching pre-recession levels. That is not going to happen overnight and it may never reach the levels we saw pre-bust. So there will be a slow recovery/expansion, at best, along with population growth.
Excellent point that I neglected to address in his post and glad I did as I couldn't have described it as accurately and concisely as you did.
We are so far behind because the jobs lost were disproportionately construction jobs. Just before the crash we had a bubble not only of homes being built, but jobs building them (and selling them, and decorating them etc, etc.) When the bubble burst those jobs went with it. We are not going to get them back unless the home building industry comes back and new home sales start reaching pre-recession levels. That is not going to happen overnight and it may never reach the levels we saw pre-bust. So there will be a slow recovery/expansion, at best, along with population growth.
Your comment is valuable in that it makes the point that we need a DIVERSIFIED economy. The housing communities that Arizona developers were frantically building in the 1990s were largely being filled by three groups.
1. Retirees looking for a pleasant environment.
2. Californians and people from other prosperous states who could sell their homes in the housing boom for a shocking amount over what they had paid and buy a bigger, better house in Arizona with their cash profits (often overlapping with group 1). The fact that so many of these people were from California no doubt contributed the emphasis on California that the economic outlook meeting focused on.
3. People who came here because our employment outlook seemed quite bright, but was, in fact, dependent on the housing boom.
Right now the only houses we really need are still for retirees. The construction industry CAN'T come back the way it was, as long as people aren't coming here from other places for something other than retirement. Because as rude a it seems to point out, retirees die. And their still rather-new houses are going up for sale, leaving little need for acres of brand-spanking new ones. It's just as much of a vicious circle as the education system is.
Our preponderance of retirees also leads to the lack of interest so many Arizonans seem to have in improving our public education. Retirees naturally have a lack of interest in schools, as their children are long gone from them. Add to that retirees' emotional ties being way back in Michigan or Minnesota and you have double the lack of interest. Non-profit organizations of all types have the same problem in Arizona. Compare the budgets of our United Way groups and United Ways in states with far less transient population bases. Arizona United Ways have next to no money compared to those in places like Pittsburgh or Cleveland or Indianapolis ... places where people have deep roots and see the need for UW services. We also see this phenomenon in sports. Do Detroit Tiger fans come here and transfer their allegiance to the Diamondbacks? Do Chicago Bears fans root for the Cardinals with any intensity? No. And one final thing: we can't blame the lack of interest in Arizona public schools only on Baby Boomers. The so-called Greatest Generation that retired here didn't give a hoot about the schools (or the charities or the sports teams) either.
So back to the original point: we need to DIVERSIFY. How to do that? How do we attract businesses from other states when we are perceived nationwide (rightly or wrongly) as a bunch of obsessives dedicated to shutting down abortion clinics, building and filling private prisons, oppressing women and gay people, caring little for education, and fighting immigration (when, in fact, Latinos are going out faster than they are coming in). It's proven that tax cuts have not worked. So what else can we do?
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.
