Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/09/15
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]In a message dated 9/15/03 12:44:31 PM, klw.51@comcast.net writes: << In my state (Michigan) schools are paid per student enrolled, and most of the money comes from the state. Therefore students lost to vouchers or private schools by any means takes money directly from the public school. As you said the private schools do cheery pick and often they are only K-6 or K-8 schools, leaving the the more expensive 9-12 students to the public schools. Your statement about teacher salaries is VERY misleading. Most teachers I know spend a great dceal more than 6 hours on the job. Grading papers, planning lessons, filling out misc. paperwork and dealing with parents takes many more hours. Most teachers that I know also spend The 2 summer months working on curriculum committees and attending school to enhance their skills. >> You have made part of my point. It is the State and local communities that decide how funds are allocated to public education, not the Federal government. The funds generally come from three sources, property taxes, the state general revenue fund raised by income and use taxes, and, recently, statewide lotteries. Michigan is to be complimented on funding public education largely out of general revenues since the tax load is spread more evenly. Still, those taxes are paid for life by parents whose children attend both public and private schools. Other states, including my own, New York, rely on property taxes as the primary source of revenue. The state suppliments these taxes on a per pupil basis to equalize expenditure between richer and poorer communities, but these state payments amount to less than 25% of the budget of even the poorer districts. Some affluent districts receive no state aid at all. I have never heard of a state or school district authorizing a voucher of more than $1000 per pupil to assist private education. There may well be one, but not near my district. The per pupil cost of education in my district is close to $12,000 a year, the majority paid for by property taxes. This is half the cost of tuition in an Ivy League university and a good deal more than the tuition in most state colleges. It is also more than the tuition at most private secondary schools and about triple that of tuition in parochial schools. Logic says that it would be more economical to close the public education system down and sell off the properties, using education funding to pay the tuition of all students in the private school of their choice. But of course the NEA and the AFT would condemn the practice as leading to the collapse of Western civilization. As far as teacher's salaries, I notice you didn't quibble about the amount, just the working hours. Teacher's pay and benefits have escalated dramatically since the dark days of the '50s. In addition to long paid vacations, teachers get full medical benefits and very generous state secured retirement programs. Most also have job tenure, essentially meaning that they cannot get fired unless they sexually assault their colleagues at high noon in the town square. Removing a tenured teacher for cause in my state takes an average of three years of litigation and costs a school district an average of $500,000 in fees and settlements. Admittedly some teachers work more than six hours a day and some get drunk at lunch. There are good and bad eggs in every profession. Summer training is laudable but additional educational degrees are usually compensated by salary increases. I spent 32 years in the bowels of the education system, both secondary and university level and know whereof I speak. But I used a Leica to photograph all school events so that makes me a good person. Larry Z - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html