Posted on 09/18/2005 1:50:38 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
Below is a school district in Texas that got it right and their success put them under the court gun.
When the court threatened to block student transfers, teachers began working to help families set up homeschooling.
Two school districts embroiled in racial tug of war (this one has it all: choice, naacp, money tug) ***...[LINK in Post #1] ***....Bienski doesn't deny that Mumford relies on the state aid it receives for the transfers, but he insists that has not been the secret to the school district's recent success. Mumford has been successful, Bienski says, because it does more with less.
There is some evidence of that.
Bienski serves not only as the school district superintendent, but also as the principal of all three campuses. When the district began its aggressive building campaign in 1997, Bienski served as the general contractor, saving the district millions of dollars. The district owns all three campuses outright.
The school district stocked its computer labs by taking advantage of grant programs. When it launched its high school a few years ago, it focused on academics and avoided costly athletic programs such as football. ....***
Looks cheap. And with the explosive growth in Chicago suburbia, I can't imagine what it is down there! My beef is with the over-the-top extravagance of the buildings. Inlaid oak flooring and brass hardware, etc. Spending thousands on what should cost hundreds. Ever wonder why districts complain they have no money for teacher salaries?
Teachers' unions will fight this tooth and nail and their best buddies, the Democratic Party machine, will fight with them.
But the people are stronger than these groups. It's beginning to show.
Parents are getting hip to bogus "My child...." bumper stickers.
They don't like it when their child needs remedial reading, writing and math in college.
They don't like superintendents getting $200K - $300K salaries and thousands more in benefits.
They don't like fancy schools with incompetent teachers manning the classrooms.
They don't like LIBERAL politics and social instruction invading their schools.
I could imagine the uproar from "parents" about that! Any disruption of athletic schedule is a sin. Loss of music or foreign language...not a peep.
When money is tight, you go for the basics and do sports on the side.
I don't see one word about kids of immigrants overwhelming the school districts in this border state, so I guess it's not a problem. The problem seems to lie with those uncaring, heartless, mindless, childless, rich suburban folk in their $400,000 homes who vote "no" on the bond issues.
Leni
C+ huh? That's "C" for...cool?
Excellent point.
LOL. I don't know.
Maybe C for clueless.
***.........Under No Child requirements, districts must inform parents about the free tutoring, but many skirt the rules by sending letters "laden with the usual bureaucratic jargon," wrote Harvard University professor Paul E. Peterson in Education Next magazine.
The motive: If parents deep-six the letters and ignore the program, districts pocket the unused money. "They have a clear financial disincentive to encourage student participation," Peterson wrote....***
http://www.sptimes.com/2005/09/18/State/Will_free_tutors_help.shtml
Exactly right.
What kind of idiots would elect a school board that would even propose this kind of garbage?
Only the insane would take out a 30 year loan on something that will last only 2 or 3 years. I'm referring to the computers.
If the voters are not held responsible for the decisions of the school boards, then why even vote?
Well? Private individuals and businesses MAINTAIN their buildings and BUDGET and PLAN for maintenance costs as part of the life cycle costs of owning the buildings.
Have you ever noticed all government officials start harping on the need to repair government buildings and the requirement for more money so that they can do so? Why didn't they maintain them in the first place? I particularly love the statement we hear time and time again that the school buildings are OUTDATED. What's that mean other than that they want more money? Ever notice that in Europe, England and places in the US like Harvard and Princeton, they have buildings hundreds of years old and they are still in good shape but a public school (or any government building for that matter) becomes a dangerous and unmentionable monster after 50 years of occupation and must be torn down and rebuilt?
Another thing, when it comes to schools, why is it that all new schools have to be works of art and have huge buildings and areas dedicated to sports?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.