posted
A negative side to homeschooling that parent with young children don't think about, is exactly the letting go process.
IMO, If you do a good job with homeschooling your children and fostering independent learning, your kids are going to be more independent sooner, than kids their grade level in public school.
This may mean that you need to let go of them sooner than you would otherwise.
I personally should have gone to a University at age 16. I think my life would have been different and probably better as a result. My parents couldn't deal with letting me go that much. So I stayed at a community college for two more years. Those years weren't entirely wasted by any means, but in hindsight I had to change one thing that is what I'd change. I believe my life would have ended up on a much more academic track if I had done that, one that might have suited my overall personality better than where I ended up today. (I don't have major regrets about where I am today, that is just the point at where I see a major fork in the road of my life)
My mother and I ended up in frequent conflict with each other from junior high on. She couldn't let go, and in holding on to me, she lost me more thoroughly than she would have otherwise. Now this isn't something exclusive to homeschooling mothers, but I think it is a difficulty that *none* of them think about at the outset, because that seems so distantly in the future.
Posts: 11265 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:quote: how is someone who never even took calculus supposed to teach calculus? Most people who go to public school are never taught calculus in high school.
Pre-calculus which general includes and introduction to the basic theorems and problems in calculus is standard high school math in most areas.
quote: quote: I'll bet a good home education is the exception rather than the rule. It seems to me that a good public school education is the exception rather than the rule.
Well there are studies for performance of the public schools and they don't support that contention. In fact one recent study found that when you control for socio/economic factors public schools do as well at educating students as private schools, in many cases better. In fact if you control for socio/economic factors the worst performing schools are conservative christian schools. Home schools weren't included in the study but based on what I've seen I'd be willing to bet that home schooled children on the average perform significantly worse than their public school counterparts with comparably educated parents.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by BannaOj: I don't have a problem requiring a homeschooled student to take an SAT or GED test. I think it is a reasonable requirement.
Agreed. However, timing becomes an issue -- you need to take the test(s) with enough time to get results in time for deadlines (like the recent March 2 deadline for CalGrants).
As it happens, most colleges do not require homeschooled students to take any tests they do not also require of their other applicants. That may change soon.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
One of my biggest complaints about home schooling is that its proponents rely too heavily on anecdotes to demonstrate the superiority of home schooling but they specifically exclude any anecdotes that don't fit their conclusions.
Rabbit on this point I agree with you completely. HSLDA is the biggest and most powerful legal advocate group out there, but some of their data drives me batty. They stand for views that are so cognitively dissonant that they tick me off to no end.
Some alternate information where slightly more unbiased data can be found.
quote:Originally posted by ketchupqueen: Well, the yearbooks I've seen looked like they were pretty important to the kids who participated in them; they were usually for the homeschool groups that got together twice a week or so to study science, languages, and play sports and such together.
Yeah, important was probably the wrong word choice.
Posts: 4393 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
rivka, I realize I applied to colleges ten years ago, however all of the testing deadlines for applying to colleges were pretty clearly published then, you just had to go look them up.
If they are incapable of finding out those deadlines and any other requirements then yes, they are in the unofficial "loser" homeschooling category
AJ
This site appears to have up to date CA-centered info on homeschooling teenagers.
There are also a significant portion of "homeschooling" parents that decide to "homeschool" because their child is a discipline problem in public school. This is the biggest recipe for disaster. These parents don't actually tend to run in the normal homeschooling crowds that romany or kq would participate in. Often the kids just run totally delinquent, after being removed as well. The parent is happy that they aren't getting calls from the school... until the start getting calls from the cops, and DCFS... The root cause discipline issue 99% of the time is *not* addressed by removing the kid from the school, and normally only makes the child more resentful, and the parent loses even more control than before.
That's not what I'd call homeschooling. I'd call it abdicating parental responsibility. It's things like that that make me so strongly support testing.
Posts: 2711 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:School cannot certify GPA for purposes of CalGrants. That means students either lose eligibility altogether, or must take SATs, GEDs, or other tests accepted by CSAC
IME, most college-bound students take the SAT or ACT anyway, no?
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'd agree with you [romany], but unfortunately it still comes under "homeschooling" most of the time in the legal (and statistical) sense.
Also on bias. There is a wierd dual bias that even with Rabbit's proposed study is very hard to get around.
You see a "sucessful" homeschooler is highly unlikely to put their children back into a public school.
Therefore, all the public school folks are seeing are the "unsucessful" homeschooled children.
Conversely, an "unsucessful" homeschooler isn't necessarily even going to be a data collection point for "homeschoolers" because they put their children back in school.
The collegiate level may even things out, as far as data collection goes, although then the bias is going to be towards those academically inclined to pursue a higher education.
There is a spectrum of hippie-libertarian to fundamentalistChristian-conservative in homeschooling that does not facilitate easy collection of data. That's also why you will find so many different kinds of homeschooling groups out there.
Some hippie-liberatian types that are off the grid may not even want their children to have birth certificates, at the extreme end.
The not-so-fundamentalist- more liberal types (or as my mother affectionately called them the "bean sprout crew") tend to even if Christian themselves actively resent the way the "Christian fundamentalists" have taken over the vanguard of the homeschooling movement in recent years. That is why there are a wider variety of organizations to choose from at this time. But the hippie-libertarian types aren't generally folks that are into large-scale structured organizations to begin with, so to become that organized tends to run against their grain.
As far as higher education goes, to me, adaptability is key. Even if the individual may not be as prepared as others, are they able to adapt and learn in the new environment.
I don't view "adapatability" to be the same thing as "socialization" but I do think the two may have some corellation.
quote:School cannot certify GPA for purposes of CalGrants. That means students either lose eligibility altogether, or must take SATs, GEDs, or other tests accepted by CSAC
IME, most college-bound students take the SAT or ACT anyway, no?
In time to get the results before March 2 of their senior year? And more and more colleges have changed their requirements -- quite a few no longer require either test any longer. Again, it's not that many or even most of these extra steps can't be dealt with; it's that attending a non-accredited school adds extra steps that students may not be aware of until it becomes a problem. You can call them a loser if it helps; I have to help them figure out what the heck to do now that they've missed the deadline.
And I already mentioned that some of the issues I'm talking about mostly apply to non-accredited school which are not also homeschools, where exceptions are often made.
posted
Also as far as getting the results by March 2nd I think that was pretty standard even when I was applying for schools. You should tell the testing service what schools you want the information sent to at the time you take the test, so that they get them in time.
Maybe a high school guidance counsellor would be on top of this, without a parent or student having to look it up, but looking it up isn't that great of a hardship.
posted
While anecdote, is not data, I'd love to hear about some of Rabbit's negative interactions with homeschoolers.
I think it *is* important for other homeschoolers to accept that there are *some* parents who are doing their children a disservice by homeschooling.
Due to the fragmented nature of homeschooling, these folks are not necessarily known to the others. Because of my mother's unique position, as well as my own, I believe I have been able to observe a broader cross-section of both kinds of homeschoolers. I still have no idea where the hard data would fall.
posted
Again anecdote is not data, but of three families that homeschooled their children together (each in their own homes but we did a lot of group activities together), my brothers and I, are the only ones that would consider doing it for our own children... and that's only 33%. All of the mothers were college graduates, 2 of the three had teaching degrees.
100% of those children are college graduates though, and at least half of them have graduate degrees, so from the strictly academic persepctive you'd have to say it was a sucess. But 66% of the children are truly ADAMANT that they would NEVER homeschool their own children.
posted
There was one girl per family, and all three of the girls have struggled with serious depression at one point or another, as they attempted to reconcile the fundamentalist component of their upbringing with being an independent female.
I am actually the only one of the three that divorces the fundamentalism and subsequent depression from being homeschooled in the first place. The others view it bag and baggage as part of their homeschooling.
Posts: 11265 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by BannaOj: Also as far as getting the results by March 2nd I think that was pretty standard even when I was applying for schools. You should tell the testing service what schools you want the information sent to at the time you take the test, so that they get them in time.
I was referring to the CalGrant application deadline, not the deadline for any particular school.
Of course it's possible to look all these things up. Not really my point.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Actually I suspect it is probably worse for an unacredited private school where the parents assume the school will be looking those sorts of things up for them, than it is for a private home school where you know you are on your own.
posted
Or than a private school that is accredited, even if no one there actually is taking care of these things for you. And that was my point. Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote: Also on bias. There is a wierd dual bias that even with Rabbit's proposed study is very hard to get around.
You see a "sucessful" homeschooler is highly unlikely to put their children back into a public school.
Therefore, all the public school folks are seeing are the "unsucessful" homeschooled children.
Conversely, an "unsucessful" homeschooler isn't necessarily even going to be a data collection point for "homeschoolers" because they put their children back in school.
I'm not sure this is as big a problem as you implied.
First, I had no intention of looking at home schoolers who go on to public school. My idea would be to start with states that require competency testing of home schoolers. We would take a cohort of parents with college degrees who homeschool and a second cohort of parents with college degrees who volunteer weekly in their children's schools. We would then compare both groups of students based on their test scores to see which group performs the highest and which progresses the most rapidly.
Within such a study it would be interesting to look at children who started in a homeschool but later moved to a regular classroom. If we had test scores for these students compared to those who stayed in homeschool we could test your hypothesis that unsuccessful home schoolers are more likely to move into public schools.
The only bias I would anticipate would be that some parents choose to home school because their child has learning disabilities that aren't being adequately dealt with in a regular classroom. But the parents I've known who've done this don't typically home school for long periods of time. They pull their kids out of the classroom for a year or two to give them individual help to deal with their problems and then put them back in regular schools. I think we could adequately control for this bias by specifically accounting for students with known learning disabilities and excluding families from the study who switch back and forth between home schools and traditional schools.
I also disagree with your assessment that unsuccessful home schoolers are more likely to put their children back in to regular schools. Some of the most successful home schoolers I've known home schooled for K-6 but then sent their children to a regular high school or a community college in their teenage years. (Attending a community college isn't a traditional high school experience but it isn't exactly home schooling either).
On the other hand, some of the worst home school situations I've dealt with were from extreme non-conformist parents (either the hippie-libertarians or the fundamentalist Christian type). The more fanatically parents are devoted to home schooling the less likely they are to critically consider whether its working or not. Perhaps this is because their educational goals are way outside the mainstream and sheltering their children from mainstream society may in fact be their most important educational goal. I've even known of families who home schooled to avoid scrutiny from child protective services for their highly questionable disciplinary practices (I'm not talking about simple spankings here).
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by BannaOj: FYI, It is entirely possible to teach yourself algebra, geometry, trigonometry and calculus, using existing textbooks.
While I can't honestly disagree with this statement, as a professional educator I do have to disagree with the implication that good teachers are superfluous.
The best most independent self motivated students can often teach themselves any subject from a book. That doesn't mean that every study can or will do it. Or that even the best students will arrive at the same depth of understanding or appreciation for the subject without the aid of a good teacher.
In my experience the top 5% of the students will succeed no matter what the teacher does, the bottom 5% will fail no matter what the teacher does. It is the 90% in the middle where the teacher makes the most impact. Heck even for the top 5%, a good teacher can make the process more fun and more intellectually stimulating.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by BannaOj: If they are incapable of finding out those deadlines and any other requirements then yes, they are in the unofficial "loser" homeschooling category
Right, because anyone who relies on the help of a teacher or councillor to point out something they could have looked up if they had known what to look up is a "loser".
I have a BIL who is from an immigrant family. His parents were well educated but knew nothing about the US system. They had little money so they lived in a poor neighborhood with weak schools. He was lucky enough to have a dedicated teacher who encouraged him to apply to some of the top schools, helped him identify what tests he should be taking, what scholarships were available and when the deadlines were. Because of help from that teacher, he was able to attend MIT and YALE.
Sure, that information was all publicly available and if he had known what to look for he could have found it all in a public library. But he didn't and by his assessment he wouldn't have if not for the guidance of a dedicated teacher. I guess that makes him a "loser".
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
That's not what BannaOj said at all. She was specifically referring to the homeschooling population in that post. I agree that if you're incapable of finding out deadlines - as a parent/child team that has been responsible for the child's education for years, then you're probably a "loser" type of homeschooling family. Initiative and the ability to find the information you need are pretty important skills if you're going to be homeschooling.
Posts: 2409 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by BannaOj: While anecdote, is not data, I'd love to hear about some of Rabbit's negative interactions with homeschoolers.
I don't think its appropriate to share specific details about students I've worked with but I will give some generalities. My experiences are with home schoolers once they enter the University, not those who move into primary and secondary schools. Most of my experience was at Montana State University, for some reason I saw far fewer home schoolers in Utah. The home schoolers who came to MSU were largely from remote areas of the west and so they didn't generally have the option of taking community college classes or participating in other organized classes. My general observations based on a variety of different types of interactions are as follows.
1. Homeschool students lacked important learning skills necessary in a college environment like taking notes in a large lecture, adhering to a schedule, taking exams in crowded room, and so forth. They either lacked the confidence to ask questions in a large class or asked so many questions that they interfered with other students.
2. Home school students nearly always had some big gaps in their preparation. This might have been less of a problem for someone interested in the liberal arts but it was a big problem in math and science. Some of what they didn't know was just shocking.
3. Home school students were generally less independent learners than their public school peers. I know that this is directly contrary to AJs personal experience. They were perhaps like the next generation AJ referred to. Some were accustomed to having a personal tutor for every problem. Others expected University profs to taylor assignments and exams to their whims.
4. Home school students had a hard time adapting to a ridged class schedule. They were so accustomed to moving at their own pace that they found it impossible to keep pace with the rest of the class.
5. Home school students had a harder than usual time adapting to meeting new people, making friends and building a social network at college. They often had a very hard time on group projects since they had never worked on a team.
6. Home school students typically had less mature critical thinking skills. They were less comfortable dealing with complexity, diversity and controversy than students who had been to traditional schools. This was most evident in scholarship interviews.
This is just a short list, I'll add more as it comes to me.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Jhai: That's not what BannaOj said at all. She was specifically referring to the homeschooling population in that post. I agree that if you're incapable of finding out deadlines - as a parent/child team that has been responsible for the child's education for years, then you're probably a "loser" type of homeschooling family. Initiative and the ability to find the information you need are pretty important skills if you're going to be homeschooling.
You miss my point. There are advantages to having mentors who know the system. One disadvantage of home schooling is that you forego access to these people. That is a real disadvantage and one parents should be aware of when they choose to homeschool.
Yes its possible to make up for some of that by doing your own research and yes not every child in public or private school gets that kind of mentor. But not knowing a particular piece of information or where to find it doesn't make a person a looser. Good mentoring is a thing of worth.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
You're clearly missing mine. It is the responsibility of the homeschooling family to know this stuff far more than it is the responsibility of the average family that sends their kid to public schools. At a public school there are people, like guidance counselors and teachers, who can serve as mentors to those who don't know their way around the system, as you pointed out. Homeschooling parents know they're losing those resources by not sending their children to public schools, and thus have an added responsibility to take care of these matters.
By choosing to homeschool, the parents (and older child/teenager, to some extent), take on responsibility for knowing a lot more about education than non-homeschooling parents. Just like they're suppose to know how to find the resources for the child to learn, and to be on top of curriculum requirements to make sure that the child is learning everything that he ought to.
For example, you wouldn't require a parent with a child in a public school to know how to do or teach any high school level math in order to be a good parent. They can be a good parent without knowing that stuff (although, IMHO, they ought to know that stuff anyways). A parent who has chosen to homeschool his child, however, must be able to either teach that material to his child, or be able to find other ways to make sure his child learns that sort of material. Failing to do so it simply bad parenting.
Likewise, if the parent/teenager homeschooling team wants the kid to attend college, they have a responsibility to find the information they need to do so. And if they are incapable of finding out such easily available information (which was the hypothetical BannaOj was posing), then I shudder to think of what else they're incapable of doing in the education of the kid. A lack of the ability to find this information strongly suggest that they are doing a lackluster job of educating the kid, and are thus "loser" homeschoolers.
Posts: 2409 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Pre-calculus which general includes and introduction to the basic theorems and problems in calculus is standard high school math in most areas.
It's a standard offering, but it's not really normal for most kids to get to the pre-calculus stage.
Curious: don't most high schools require four years of math? Mine did, which meant that, unless you were in the super-slow moving track, you'd at least cover Algebra 1, Geometry, Algebra 2/Trig, and Pre-Calc. Although my high school was in an extremely good & competitive district (in California), so maybe it was just the area...
Posts: 2409 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Pre-calculus which general includes and introduction to the basic theorems and problems in calculus is standard high school math in most areas.
It's a standard offering, but it's not really normal for most kids to get to the pre-calculus stage.
It is difficult to get out of taking pre-calc at my high school. You can do it by coming in at pre-algebra and only taking three years of math or doing extremely poorly in other math classes so as to not advance. I would say that pre-calc is not only the norm at my school but also at all of the high schools in the area as well.
Posts: 1327 | Registered: Aug 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Jhai: You're clearly missing mine. It is the responsibility of the homeschooling family to know this stuff far more than it is the responsibility of the average family that sends their kid to public schools.
I never missed your point for a second but you are clearly still missing mine.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Right, because anyone who relies on the help of a teacher or councillor to point out something they could have looked up if they had known what to look up is a "loser".
No one has said that, or said anything similar on this entire thread. BannaOj didn't say that, and neither did I. Nothing anyone has said would suggest that they think your BIL was a loser because he or his immigrant parents didn't know the system. I responded to your post to point this out, and then responded again when your next post again suggested that you did not understand how your original post was wrongly accusing BannaOj of making a claim that would mean your BIL was a "loser".
Posts: 2409 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Look Jhai, I'm not an idiot and I understood your point the first 2 times you made it.
Perhaps my examples and my sarcasm weren't clear. Let me try one more time to express my point. No homeschool parent can know everything known by a good team of educational professionals. What those professionals have to offer is of value that can not be replaced by a parent whose done some research.
Those gaps aren't just reflective of "loser" home schools -- they are reflective of a movement that as a whole discounts the value of trained educational professionals.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
You have far more trust in educational professionals than I do. And I've attended some of the best schools in this country - and teach at the college level in an R1 university. Good educational teams are awfully rare, and often times a very motivated parent or teenage can have better information - at least for their particular situation - than even an excellent team of educational professionals.
Posts: 2409 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by The Rabbit: [Homeschooling is] a movement that as a whole discounts the value of trained educational professionals.
I would say that it's a movement that judges the value that the child gets from the trained professionals in the current system to be less than the value of the one-on-one help from a parent.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:No homeschool parent can know everything known by a good team of educational professionals. What those professionals have to offer is of value that can not be replaced by a parent whose done some research.
And as others have said before, not everyone in public schools in every area has access to a good team of professionals.
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
Boon
unregistered
posted
I've stayed out of this thread because it's a very personal subject for me and my family...but I had to respond to this:
quote: No homeschool parent can know everything known by a good team of educational professionals. What those professionals have to offer is of value that can not be replaced by a parent whose done some research.
I don't claim to know everything known by a good team of educational professionals. No single teacher can. What I do know is how to seek out great teachers for my children in the areas they need help that I can't provide. THAT is the beauty of homeschooling, to me. The freedom to put my children in optimum learning situations...and remove them from detrimental ones, at my discretion.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by AvidReader: Luv, I personally don't have the money to send poor or neglected kids to private school. I don't have the people skills to convince a disinterested parent to look into a charter school.
Yes, that sounds very familiar.
You said yourself you're willing to spend extra in tax dollars, so you must have some money.
You seem to read and write just fine in these forums, so your communication skills (I'm guessing) are in no way impaired.
Forgive what may seem like personal attacks. I don't personally dislike you.
It's just that if people were as charitable with their own resources as they like to be with mine (or anyone else's), we wouldn't even be having this debate.
Posts: 23 | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
That seems a little unfair. I'm betting AvidReader can't afford a whole year of private school tuition. But if there was a charity set up that he was aware of that served kids in his area and had a proven track record, I bet he'd be willing to give what he could toward it.
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by ketchupqueen: That seems a little unfair. I'm betting AvidReader can't afford a whole year of private school tuition. But if there was a charity set up that he was aware of that served kids in his area and had a proven track record, I bet he'd be willing to give what he could toward it.
Agreed. I kind of figured my post would come across a little combative, so thank you for the opportunity to clarify.
Please note that I never asked him to pay a whole year of private school tuition for any particular child.
Here's my beef, and I'll leave it at this: Many like to talk about what others should be willing to do with their tax dollars ("if the child is in your community, you should pay for their education, whether it's your child or not").
I lean away from forced wealth-redistribution programs (for the most part). I prefer viable alternatives that don't force people's hands in order to avoid the debate altogether.
I find it quite unfair when people lump me in with the you-don't-care-about-other-people's-kids crowd because I prefer to avoid a heavier tax burden when thinking of educational solutions.
There seemed to be an implication of that in several posts on this thread (not to me personally of course), and I wanted to offer a voice for the other side.
Posts: 23 | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, how about you set up a non-profit that funds low-income kids for home- or private-schooling, then? I'd donate. Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Once again, an unintentially combative sentence. I apologize. With sleep-deprivation and forum-addiction comes a loss of diplomacy and... well, manners.
I simply meant, if you had seen it (a page ago). Not "if you had been paying attention!"
Posts: 23 | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Funny, I read the whole thread too, and even with all the generous people on here who care about underprivelaged children, you're right. Nobody said anything specifically about setting up a non-profit.
Is public education as bad as homeschoolering proponents would like us to believe? No.
Public schools aren't set up to give the best education possible to each student... the best possible education for any student is a series of one on one courses taught by people trained both in the field, and education, with frequent travel, and socialization.
Providing the best possible education to everyone would require a total restructing of the economy.
Homeschooling seeks to provide the "one on one" aspect while public schooling aims at the "trained in the field and education." Homeschooling aims at hitting travel, and public schooling aims at hitting socialization.
Both systems of education leave a lot to be desired.
For a select few parents, with the available resources and dedication, homeschooling is a great option. But for the vast majority of parents, sending your child to public school will provide a better overall education.
How to fix?
There's a lot of things that need fixing. My current beef is funding for schools.
My district serves a population of about 13,000, and about 2000 school age children. Our total budget is about 8000 dollars per child. 20% of our students are on special needs plans, and those students on average cost the district 17,000. Around 1% of our students need to be placed out of district because of serious health or learning problems. These students cost us, on average, 70,000 per year.
Our operating budget is 16,000,000 plus or minus a little bit. 20 students, at 70k per, is 1.4 million. About 10% of our budget goes to 1% of our students, and another 40% of our budget goes to 20% of our students. This leaves about 4000 dollars per child for almost 80% of the district.
Over the last 8 years, increasing cost of special education has cost us 15% of the high school faculty, increasing average class size by about 20%, and meaning we don't offer nearly as many electives as we used to, while the building and facilities erode, and we have been unable to upgrade our technology to provide the best education possible.
We're in danger of not being certified by the state, because our school is becoming dangerous due to erosion of the facilities, and our inability to replace or repair what needs fixing, as well as an inability to provide everything our students need in order to learn.
Our school consistently has among the best test scores in the state, and sends kids to a great range of colleges. But our ability to keep providing that education is undermined more and more every year, as we are required to spend more and more money on a minority of students, at the expense of the education of the majority.
This is not an uncommon problem. More and more students around the state and country are enrolled in special ed programs that cost the school districts a tremendous amount of money.
All our district needs is about 4 years at 6000 dollars per student for the majority of our students. This will NOT happen without a serious overhaul in how special ed funding is handled.
My numbers might be off, i don't have the budget in front of me right now. I can tell you that over the last 8 years, our special ed budget has risen at an average of 17% per year, while funding has increased at abotu 3% per year.
[ March 11, 2008, 06:35 AM: Message edited by: Paul Goldner ]
Posts: 4112 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Cry]](graemlins/cry.gif)
