Posted on 09/28/2005 4:43:58 PM PDT by SmithL
SACRAMENTO -- Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger on Wednesday signed legislation that requires public schools to give more information about where their money is going and gives county superintendents more oversight of charter schools.
___
SCHOOL SPENDING: California schools will now have to report the average per-pupil spending and teachers' salaries at individual schools in the annual accountability reports they are required to give parents and the state.
The change should shed light on the inequities in spending within school districts, such as whether some schools have more qualified teachers than others, said Sen. Joe Simitian, D-Palo Alto, who introduced the bill, SB687. Previously, districts only had to report districtwide averages.
"I think this measure will force some difficult conversations in districts around the state. I think they are conversations we need to have," Simitian said Wednesday.
A report earlier this month by the public policy research group Education Trust-West found that schools with higher numbers of poor and racial minority students have teachers who earn less and are generally less experienced than their counterparts at more affluent schools — even within the same district.
State law requires schools to post annual school accountability report cards listing everything from test scores to building maintenance.
___
CHARTER SCHOOLS: Charter schools will have more oversight from county superintendents under SB430, which the governor signed Wednesday. . . .
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
Yeah but what's this CHARTER SCHOOLS: Charter schools will have more oversight from county superintendents, crap!
The change should shed light on the inequities in spending within school districts, such as whether some schools have more qualified teachers than others, said Sen. Joe Simitian, D-Palo Alto, who introduced the bill, SB687. Previously, districts only had to report districtwide averages.
If a school doesn't pay as much as the union wants, is that because the teacher is incompetent or is it because they are organized differently? For example, if the school doesn't spend its money on teachers and instead provides more online services from nationally recognized outstanding lecturers with classroom assistants instead, what's wrong with that?
You think the union won't like this? I beg to differ. This is just a way of burdening charter schools with the paperwork, bureaucratic bullying, and nitpicking they were orgaized to escape.
Call me crazy but I believe you can never have too much information when it comes to how education dollars are squandered.
OK, you're crazy, because you think spending on oversight delivers accountability. It doesn't. 25% of your educational dollar is spent on bureaucratic "oversight," "grant management," "program compliance," etc. Is that be enough for you? I think it's too much.
I guess you like employing unionized Democrats to exert centralized control instead of spending the money in the classroom to do what the parents want. Conservatives are funny that way.
That caught my eye as well. This needs to be a warning to all enthusiasts of charter schools and vouchers: What government funds, it controls. Best to remember that always.
I don't think you are crazy. I think you are right on the money! (No pun intended.)
As the mother of a Virginia teacher, I would say it is because of disciplinary problems and parents who will not support the teachers by encouraging their children to do their homework, listen in class, and do the best that they possibly can to get a decent education.
Think of all the educational programs that have been generated over the years, each with its own qualifications and rules. Reagan tried to fix it with block grants for a reason. The oversight often costs more than the amount that gets to beneficiaries.
I think it should be each Principal's duty to report these averages in his or her school to the school board or whomever they are responsible to. Then, anyone with a lick of sense can look at the reports and see if there are any inequities.
My point was refuting newzjunkey's "there can't be too much oversight," not that there shouldn't be any. Best to keep it local.
I doubt the teachers' salaries are where the inequities lie.
Unless they are non-union, temps, or unaccredited (IMO, accreditation is a monopoly barrier to entry). Remember, an unemployed engineer won't be accredited, but would be far more qualified to teach math than most accredited high school teachers.
Also, building maintenance would factor in. If you have ever seen a NYC school, you will know what I mean.
Charter schools often don't own their facilities, but, once again, special building codes governing schools often turn into horrendously expensive traps: new construction being too costly to attempt, so the old stuff that is deteriorated to the point of dangerous remains in use.
A lot of that was created by class-size-reduction under Proposition 8. The law created new openings at schools in well to do districts and the better teachers from the inner city schools left to get those jobs, leaving the openings in the inner city schools for the dregs of the teaching profession.
Teachers often blame parents, forgetting that those parents are products of public schools.
Yep.
Teachers need to be accredited. Not everyone who has knowledge of a subject is qualified to teach it. Also, the old saying that those who can DO and those who can't TEACH should never be the rule in this country or even an option.
Those "bad parenting skills," as you call them, were born in American colleges and universities, where the misbegotten seeds of Cultural Marxism were first sown. I suggest you look into the activities of the Frankfurt School. Further, the immorality that led to many of those divorces was first promulgated by a sado-masochistic homosexual pedophile, Alfred Kinsey, at Indiana University, a public school.
Remember, when children first enter school, they are told in no uncertain terms that the State is in charge. If their parents are mean to them, they can get mommy and daddy in trouble. Kids aren't stupid. They figure out who runs the show in a hurry. It's down hill from there all the way through college.
Those parents with bad skills were products of "Why Johnny Can't Read," "the sexual revolution," the "Free Speech Movement," and don't-stay-at-home mommy feminism. ALL were products of Cultural Marxism promulgated in public schools brought to America by the Frankfurt School and given high station under the Roosevelt Administration to a willing, indeed, complict academe.
Public schools.
There is no correlation between accreditation and classroom performance, none.
Not everyone who has knowledge of a subject is qualified to teach it.
Beats having a teacher who doesn't have a decent understanding of it, which is common.
Also, the old saying that those who can DO and those who can't TEACH should never be the rule in this country or even an option.
A platitude in search of a point.
I have been made aware of the fact that you home school your children. That is fine if it works for you. However, do not denigrate the teachers of this country just because you may have found a few who were not well qualified. I would not want someone teaching my children who had not been through the proper educational program and passed with decent grades.
I don't think you and I have anything further to discuss. You have your own agenda, which is fine, and I have my own point of view.
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.