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.
The reason students don't achieve is NOT a funding issue. It's a PARENTING/parent involvement issue.
I say NO, absolutely NOT to a tax increase.
I'm sure there waste in the system, and that there are at least a few admin jobs that could be cut. No, that's not big money. But show me you're squeezing every penny and there's no waste or fraud...and THEN talk to me about raising taxes.
Is more MONEY REALLY the solution...I think most clear thinking, intelligent people know that it's not.
The reason students don't achieve is NOT a funding issue. It's a PARENTING/parent involvement issue.
I say NO, absolutely NOT to a tax increase.
I'm sure there waste in the system, and that there are at least a few admin jobs that could be cut. No, that's not big money. But show me you're squeezing every penny and there's no waste or fraud...and THEN talk to me about raising taxes.
Is more MONEY REALLY the solution...I think most clear thinking, intelligent people know that it's not.
I'd like to see where funding schools systems with enormous budgets has proven to increase school performance and quality.
If the ultimate goal of good schools is to spur economic development, lure companies and high-quality residents, then it's been proven in this region alone that it doesn't work.
The reason students don't achieve is NOT a funding issue. It's a PARENTING/parent involvement issue.
I say NO, absolutely NOT to a tax increase.
I'm sure there waste in the system, and that there are at least a few admin jobs that could be cut. No, that's not big money. But show me you're squeezing every penny and there's no waste or fraud...and THEN talk to me about raising taxes.
Is more MONEY REALLY the solution...I think most clear thinking, intelligent people know that it's not.
Well, there is the situation where you can attract higher quality teachers. You're not going to get a teacher with a grad degree and $50k in debt accepting a job for 35k when a neighboring county can offer 45k. Schools get old and need updated facilities/technology. The PG school system is a large school system.
It's not that funding alone improves schools. It's what you do with that money. Where you can get the greatest impact. But it would be nice to be able to attract top talent. That's the rule for any organization. If you want top talent, you have to be able to afford that talent. Finding good teachers is a very competitive market. Especially those with post graduate education.
Where has more money for schools yielded better results?
You certainly don't think starving a school system is the answer do you? How about money for:
1. attracting top talent. Those with graduate degrees. If county a can pay them 45k and county b can only pay them 35k, where do you think that talented teacher will go?
2. programs like the performing arts and STEM requires teachers with skills sets and also up-to-date facilities like science labs, computer labs. I remember going to school in DC and half of the equipment in the class was either broken or missing. It takes money to furnish labs so that kids can actually put what they learn into practice.
3. Schools need to be rebuilt and new ones need to be built to relieve over-crowding. A teacher/student ration of 1/20 is a lot better than 1/35. A teach would be able to share more attention with less students.
I know there are some teachers who can chime in. North Beach Person?
I don't believe in throwing money down the drain. I'd rather take a risk on improving education than on something else. That's all. i know there are a lot of cynical and jaded people who see taxes and education and balk. lol But at some point, you have to believe that it will actually work. You never know unless you try right? Or, they can kill the tax increase and we're stuck with what we have. Which apparently hasn't been enough.
But who knows? I still haven't heard any ideas on how to improve schools without money.
I don't believe in throwing money down the drain. I'd rather take a risk on improving education than on something else. But at some point, you have to believe that it will actually work. You never know unless you try right?
It's been tried all over the country.
I'm from Michigan. Bloomfield Hills (Michigan's version of Potomac) spent $18K per student. It's magnet high school is in the top10 per USNews. Nearby Pontiac (much poorer, primarily African American, worst school district in the county and region) spent $16K.
Spending per pupil is not the problem. What successful school districts tend to spend on are resources for teachers and students. What crappy districts spend on are bloated administrations, above-market infrastructure and service costs.
Well, there is the situation where you can attract higher quality teachers. You're not going to get a teacher with a grad degree and $50k in debt accepting a job for 35k when a neighboring county can offer 45k. Schools get old and need updated facilities/technology. The PG school system is a large school system.
It's not that funding alone improves schools. It's what you do with that money. Where you can get the greatest impact. But it would be nice to be able to attract top talent. That's the rule for any organization. If you want top talent, you have to be able to afford that talent. Finding good teachers is a very competitive market. Especially those with post graduate education.
You don't know what you're talking about the average teacher salary is higher in PG than in Prince Williams and isn't significantly lower than Fairfax.
You certainly don't think starving a school system is the answer do you? How about money for:
1. attracting top talent. Those with graduate degrees. If county a can pay them 45k and county b can only pay them 35k, where do you think that talented teacher will go?
2. programs like the performing arts and STEM requires teachers with skills sets and also up-to-date facilities like science labs, computer labs. I remember going to school in DC and half of the equipment in the class was either broken or missing. It takes money to furnish labs so that kids can actually put what they learn into practice.
3. Schools need to be rebuilt and new ones need to be built to relieve over-crowding. A teacher/student ration of 1/20 is a lot better than 1/35. A teach would be able to share more attention with less students.
I know there are some teachers who can chime in. North Beach Person?
But who knows? I still haven't heard any ideas on how to improve schools without money.
Yeah, I'm here.
I'll probably offend people (especially those who feel that someone has to "live" in an area to comment).
Why should I change now?
For your first point, graduate degrees are generally a death knell for people wanting to teach and looking for their first job. They're more expensive so, many times, the person with a Master's goes to the bottom of the pile. Of course this doesn't happen always, especially if the applicant belongs to the right fraternity/sorority (a real and pernicious problem in Prince George's now) or has value added inputs like being a coach.
The best Science labs are worthless if you don't have the equipment or materials to use in them. That is an issue across the system with the exception of Roosevelt and, to an extent, Flowers and Oxon Hill. The neighborhood schools have been shortchanged on Science materials for decades. It's worse now since Student Based Budgeting came along (which is just a retool of School Based Budgeting of 20 years ago).
Add to that the cohort of Science teachers who, even if they have the equipment and materials, refuse to do labs. There are many reasons for that ranging from not wanting to set up the experiment to not trusting the kids in the lab (that is a real problem).
I had to teach Earth Science a number of years ago (in a regular classroom, not a lab) and I did more labs in one quarter than one of the Chem teachers did in the 6 years he was there (which was zero).
As far as Performing Arts, the thought is that schools don't need auditoriums to facilitate that so they don't generally get put in when a school is built or remodeled. That why cafeterias are called "Multi-Purpose Rooms".
Most Counties in MD have a backlog of school construction and maintenance, that's not a PG specific problem. The issue there is that there is never enough money to fix things and the people in charge don't necessarily pay attention. The school I was most recently at was rebuilt in 1987-89, The HVAC system never worked properly and, in fact, whole areas were found (after the construction had been accepted) to not have any delivery system installed for heat or A/C. The vents were there but the piping wasn't. That wasn't fixed until this past summer.
Moving on.
Prince George's County school system has never been a high performer, it was always considered the red headed step child of the DC suburbs. That goes back decades and has nothing to do with race, it was the same when the system was 85% White.
You have a school system with an incredibly high transient rate. Kids move just not intra-County (which can be dealt with because of the system wide curricula) but between school systems and even states.
You have a system where over 70% of the students are receiving FARM. One can argue about the family income for that but the reality is FARM is an accepted (and pretty accurate) measure of poverty.
You have a system where there is always churn at the top. I've lost count but in my 31 years there were around 13 Superintendents or Acting Superintendents.
One's relationship with the Board was so toxic that the Board was abolished by the Legislature and an appointed Board was put in place. They found out that she really was impossible to work with.
(as an aside, I'm waiting for the Legislature to abolish the Montgomery County School Board since they couldn't get along with their Superintendent and fired him. I'm not holding my breath.)
Her successor resigned and was subsequently sentenced to federal prison for taking kickbacks and bid rigging while he was Superintendent.
His successor left after questions were raised about his EdD.
His successor left after questions were raised about his management style with female underlings and other issues. This was when the Filipino teacher scandal hit with the system being fined millions of dollars and enjoined from hiring foreign teachers for 5 years.
When he left, the Board ordered that one of the functionaries who left with him (the one in charge of the Filipino teacher mess) not be paid her severance. The CFO paid her anyway, resigned, and joined the former Superintendent in his new location.
He also got applauded for cutting head count. What actually happened was that most of the retirees/layoffs came back, at a higher pay scale, as consultants where they're not counted as employees. No one thought to ask about that. It continues with Maxwell.
Here's a problem, throw out Roosevelt, and compare neighborhood, non-magnet schools.
Let's compare the school I was recently at (for 25 years) with the one in Calvert County where my personal children attended.
The financial and education demographics are similar (in fact the PG school's are higher) while racial numbers are more or less reversed (90% Black in PG, 82% White in Calvert). Very middle class/upper middle class at both schools.
The graduation rate at both schools are similar.
The 9th grade retention rate at the PG school is twice that of the Calvert school.
The average SAT score is 250 points higher than the PG school. I'm not using the number since PG instituted that all Juniors, including SPED students, are required to take the SAT. That difference was back when students self-selected for SAT.
The AP scores comparison is a joke, but then again, PG requires all AP students take the corresponding AP exam so it's hard to compare. I was AP coordinator before that was required and the Calvert scores were higher.
I don't know the Calvert number but 9th graders coming to the PG school had an average reading level of 4th/5th grade.
Those are some of the problems. If I had the answers I'd pimp myself out, be a consultant and become a millionaire.
Well, there is the situation where you can attract higher quality teachers. You're not going to get a teacher with a grad degree and $50k in debt accepting a job for 35k when a neighboring county can offer 45k. Schools get old and need updated facilities/technology. The PG school system is a large school system.
It's not that funding alone improves schools. It's what you do with that money. Where you can get the greatest impact. But it would be nice to be able to attract top talent. That's the rule for any organization. If you want top talent, you have to be able to afford that talent. Finding good teachers is a very competitive market. Especially those with post graduate education.
It's not all about money. Money is important but teachers need stability (better administration) but you also have to consider the work environment and location. A lot of it teachers don't live in the county so it's a hassle to even get to PG, but then you consider the type of environment that exist where you deal with kids that have different type of social issues compared to other school systems (not all PG Schools though). Money doesn't fix everything.
Spending per pupil is not the problem. What successful school districts tend to spend on are resources for teachers and students. What crappy districts spend on are bloated administrations, above-market infrastructure and service costs.
I agree. It's where the money goes and how it is invested.
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.
