OT: How one School District got rid of the Greedy Teachers Union

[CA renter]

[quote=livinincali][quote=CA renter]Public schools also have more qualified teachers, on average, than private schools.
[/quote]

I know one thing that public schools have a lot more of than private schools. Administrative staff. In SDUSD there’s about 15,000 employees and only about 7,000-7,500 are actually class room teachers. I’m pretty sure you average private school doesn’t have a one to one ratio of non teaching staff to teaching staff.[/quote]

Definitely agree with this. Many public agencies are too top-heavy.

OTOH, the public schools often have a lot more staff because they handle higher-risk students who require a lot more resources.

[CA renter]

[quote=jeff303][quote=paramount]
You’re right it won’t happen – the state assembly in California and the governor work exclusively for public employee unions/CTA. In fact, the CTA LITERALLY writes laws for themselves and then selects a state senator that WILL introduce and pass the measure.[/quote]

Interesting, sounds a lot like ALEC.[/quote]

Yep, and a host of other corporate special interests who write laws and “own” the government. They’re far more powerful than the unions, especially at the national level. And the corporate special interests cost us a lot more money than the unions, too.

[CA renter]

[quote=AN][quote=CA renter]AN,

No, we do have the freedom, but if you don’t want to make the sacrifices to make it happen, don’t blame anyone else.

Regarding that “second income,” all too often, the second income earner is working at a loss, especially if they are working for low wages. After taxes, clothing expenses, higher food expenses (like it or not, when both people work, they’re more likely to eat out), higher transportation costs (gas, insurance, accelerated maintenance, accelerated car purchases, etc.), childcare expenses, etc…so many people are actually working for negative earnings, especially among those who are working for low wages to begin with.

And you need to re-check those numbers on private vs public schools. Most private schools that are equal to or better than comparable public schools cost more, not less. The reason public schools appear to cost more per capita is because they educate, feed, and care for the most expensive students (special education/learning disabled, socially/economically disadvantaged, ESL, etc.) and have far more resources than private schools do, especially for these students. Public schools also have more qualified teachers, on average, than private schools.

Good schools are good because of the parents whose children attend those schools. The parents have the greatest impact on how students (and schools) perform. If you want your kids to do well, nurture their curiosity and interests, read to them, take them to museums, talk to them about a variety of topics, etc. That is the #1 way to make a difference in your child’s life…and it’s all free, or nearly so.

Oh, and get them the hell away from those electronic babysitters![/quote]Who said I’m not making sacrifices? However, that’s besides the point. It doesn’t matter what I do/sacrifice, I say it like it is. I don’t see our system as having very many choices. I’m fully aware of your persuasion with the teachers union, so, I’m certain this conversation will go no where. Just stating it like how I see it, as a parent.

I would say the feminist movement will disagree with your assessment of second earner greatly. I’ll leave that at that.

I’ve rechecked my numbers many times. Public schools in SDUSD are spending about $12-13k/student. There are a lot of private schools that are charging <$10k. Good Montessori schools that feed into LJCD/Bishops/etc. are charging $10k/student. So, yes it's much cheaper. Here's a kicker, even with less $ per student, the Montessori I'm referring to have a class size of 12 to 1 for 1-3rd grade and 20 to 1 there after. That's well bellow the class size of SDUSD schools. I'm hearing class sizes of 30-35 to 1 student to teacher ratio. It doesn't matter how good you are, if you have to deal w/ 2x as many students, you'll get much lower quality. I haven't even touched on the quality of the education. The kids in the montessori are taught Mandarin and Spanish from the Preschool level and continue through 6th grade. Then there are art/band/science/etc. So yeah, looking at the quality of the schools in SDUSD and then look at the many private schools out there, I don't buy that public schools are cheaper and better. If you truly believe that's the case, why not open up the voucher system and lets see what the parents/students will do. There's nothing to be afraid of if the public schools are really as good as you say it is.[/quote] Your research is bad. You can find the costs here: http://www.cde.ca.gov/ds/fd/ec/

http://www.cde.ca.gov/ds/fd/ec/currentexpense.asp

On that last link, go down to line 564 for San Diego County's numbers. You'll see that they cost of public education runs between $8,000 and $10,000, on average.

Here's another link for per-pupil/ADA funding for public schools in California. San Diego County starts at the bottom of page 48.

http://www.dof.ca.gov/reports_and_periodicals/district_estimate/documents/LCFF_Funding_Estimates.pdf

Not only can you see that your numbers are off, but you'll also notice the incredible number of choices ranging from regular public schools, to public charters, to publicly-funded charters. Everything from the Leonardo da Vinci Health
Sciences Charter to Dehesa Charter to Nestor Language Academy Charter to the California Virtual Academy to various High Tech Highs to College Preparatory Middle School to the Learning Choice Academy to The Museum School to All Tribes Charter to Innovations Academy to Health Sciences High to the Mandarin Language Academy...and everything in between.

Just FYI, a number of the homeschool charter options allow you to homeschool from 0-5 days/week (don't ask me how they've managed to convince themselves and others that 5 days/week in school is homeschooling). During attendance days at these schools, kids can participate in various language, drama, art, science, math, literature, social studies classes, etc. They often participate in (and often win!) science, math, and other academic and fine arts/performance competitions. Some even offer junior law classes where they participate in mock trial competitions. And if that's not enough for you, some publicly-funded private charters give you money that you can use to pay for classes, extracurricular activities, and curriculum tools of your choice.

AN, don't complain about a lack of choice or freedom. You're just not willing to put in the time and energy to research these things for yourself.

One more thing...you're conflating educational freedom and choice with the public funding of anything and everything you want. In California, you have some of the greatest possible freedoms where your child's education is concerned. Legally, we're one of the most liberal states in one of the most liberal countries where educational choices are concerned. That is a fact. That you have so many publicly-funded options is just icing on the cake.

[CA renter]

And, for the record, I haven’t been involved with a teacher’s union in many years, and will probably not belong to one in the future. Too much BS from people like you who are clueless about the job.

Regarding the second income comment, above. It’ doesn’t matter what the feminists think (and I’m a feminist), the numbers don’t lie. Of course, there are other reasons for women to remain in the paid workforce after having kids, but it’s not necessarily because they are contributing much, monetarily, to the household income, especially if they are earning low wages and have to pay for childcare. I can show you the numbers if you’d like.

[an]

CAR, my numbers were from greatschools.org 3-4 years ago. It was $12-13k back then. So, it seems like there are a lot of budget cut over the last few years. But based on the parents I talked to with kids in public schools, the class size has also risen over the last few years as well. So, although the expenditure went down, our children got the short end of that stick. At a private school, $10k will get you a class size that’s 1/2 of what it is in public school. So, something is not adding up. I actually don’t want spending cut for education, I just want to get more for our tax dollar. Maybe it’s the fact that public school is much more top heavy (as you stated) that’s the reason why we’re spending so much and get so little.

As to my main point of choice. Again, I’ll repeat, you seem to be perfectly satisfied w/ the status quo. I’m not. We’ll just leave it at that.

FYI, I’m not complaining, just stating what I see. I’m fully aware of those schools you mentioned. I’m pretty sure I’ve spent more time and energy researching education options for my kids than most parents out there. I wanted more choices and I wanted those choices to be much easier for achieve for your average parents. I want the choices to be front and center for them. I want a lot more High Tech High like schools all over so people don’t have to get wait listed and hoping their kids are the lucky few to get in. I want it spread through out the entire county so parents don’t have to make a big sacrifice to send their kids to good schools. I want inter/intra district transfer to be the thing of the past and any kid can go to any school that their parents wants as long as there are space. So on and so forth. I.E. I want a lot more choices. While you’re satisfied w/ the choice we have today. We’ll just have to agree to disagree.

[paramount]

[quote=CA renter]

The Corporate/Finance Party is the only party that matters in this country, and they are behind most of our problems — from deficits, debt bubbles, a disappearing middle class, falling wages and purchasing power, societal degradation — the corporate/financial elite are behind all of it.[/quote]

And what is the world’s most profitable business?

Government.

[paramount]

[quote=CA renter]
Yep, and a host of other corporate special interests who write laws and “own” the government. [/quote]

True, it’s not just limited to the unions. I think a senator was recently arrested for this type of activity (calderon?).

[CA renter]

It happens all day long, every day. Unions are truly a very tiny part of the problem.

You can see here how labor spends far less than capital:

http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/list_indus.php

And this is just a partial list of industries that lobby in one way or another. It doesn’t include the multi-millionaire and billionaire capitalists who donate personally in order to lower labor and environmental standards, or who lobby in order to get laws passed that force people to buy or use certain goods/services (like helmets, car seats, using licensed contractors, etc., etc.), or whose companies will benefit from govt contracts of various sorts, or those whose properties will see an increase in value as public infrastructure is built to/around it, etc., etc. It also doesn’t include promises of jobs for the politicians or their friends/family members. And it doesn’t count “under the table” bribes that are far more common where private industry is concerned.

You keep barking up the wrong tree WRT unions, paramount. You do not seem to comprehend on which side you sit where labor/capital are concerned. Don’t worry, though, you have lots and lots of company, unfortunately.

[all]

[quote=AN]CAR, my numbers were from greatschools.org 3-4 years ago. It was $12-13k back then. So, it seems like there are a lot of budget cut over the last few years. But based on the parents I talked to with kids in public schools, the class size has also risen over the last few years as well. So, although the expenditure went down, our children got the short end of that stick. At a private school, $10k will get you a class size that’s 1/2 of what it is in public school. So, something is not adding up. I actually don’t want spending cut for education, I just want to get more for our tax dollar. Maybe it’s the fact that public school is much more top heavy (as you stated) that’s the reason why we’re spending so much and get so little.
[/quote]

You can check the numbers for the past 10+ years on the link CAR provided. SD unified maxed out at $10,500 few years ago. Poway unified is 20% lower.

Private schools keep the cost down by turning away high-cost students. When my friend’s kid fell behind the grade level in reading the administrator told my friend to get a tutor or take the kid out. There are far fewer subsidized lunches, special needs or remedial cases in private schools.

[an]

[quote=all][quote=AN]CAR, my numbers were from greatschools.org 3-4 years ago. It was $12-13k back then. So, it seems like there are a lot of budget cut over the last few years. But based on the parents I talked to with kids in public schools, the class size has also risen over the last few years as well. So, although the expenditure went down, our children got the short end of that stick. At a private school, $10k will get you a class size that’s 1/2 of what it is in public school. So, something is not adding up. I actually don’t want spending cut for education, I just want to get more for our tax dollar. Maybe it’s the fact that public school is much more top heavy (as you stated) that’s the reason why we’re spending so much and get so little.
[/quote]

You can check the numbers for the past 10+ years on the link CAR provided. SD unified maxed out at $10,500 few years ago. Poway unified is 20% lower.

Private schools keep the cost down by turning away high-cost students. When my friend’s kid fell behind the grade level in reading the administrator told my friend to get a tutor or take the kid out. There are far fewer subsidized lunches, special needs or remedial cases in private schools.[/quote]I’m not defending my greatschool.org’s number. I guess they were misreporting, which is why they took it down. But even with the actual number CAR posted, I’m still not satisfied w/ the status quo. We’re paying on par w/ some of the private school (excluding the elite LJCD, Bishops, etc). Those schools have class size that’s 1/2 of what the public school kids have to deal with. Why?

You and CAR like to point out special ed as a reason why the public school cost is so high. Something is not adding up. I don’t have special needs kids, so I don’t know exactly what it takes to educated them, but I do have some questions. What’s the % of students are special needs? How much does it really cost to educate special needs vs regular students? Do you think that if we move the special needs kids to a different spending pool, we can get public school class size to decrease by 1/2?

Lastly, I still stand by my original statement that I’m dissatisfied w/ the choice we have today. CAR and you are fine w/ the status quo, I’m not. But we can agree to disagree. But I like to ask you two who think the public school system is just fine and in many cases are superior than the private schools with more qualified teachers, then why not open it up to competition? If public school is as great as you make it out to be, then there’s nothing to be afraid of, right? People will naturally just stick with the public school, since it’s better.

[livinincali]

This article from 2007 says SDUSD spends 18% of it’s budget to support special needs. Of the total student population 12% have special needs. So if you work out the math a special needs kid gets about twice as much spending as the non special needs kid. It does have an impact but not a huge impact. If you had 10% of your school special needs and it took twice as much spending to educate them versus a regular kid, then you’d have to boost prices by 10% across the board. So any private school that costs less than a 10% discount to public education is doing a better job financially.

http://www.sandi.net/cms/lib/CA01001235/Centricity/Domain/155/relatedfiles/HehirReport/hehir_issues.pdf

[all]

AN,

As CAR pointed out – you do have options. You are not forced to send your kid to a public school, unless your kid has special needs (not necessarily due to medical condition, but also due to socio-economic conditions).

You don’t have options when it comes to paying your taxes. You have to pay your taxes and some of that money will be used to fund the public education system regardless of your participation in that system.

I am not saying that public schools are outperforming private schools. Au contraire, I am not satisfied with my kids’ school and I am reevaluating options.

[an]

[quote=all]AN,

As CAR pointed out – you do have options. You are not forced to send your kid to a public school, unless your kid has special needs (not necessarily due to medical condition, but also due to socio-economic conditions).

You don’t have options when it comes to paying your taxes. You have to pay your taxes and some of that money will be used to fund the public education system regardless of your participation in that system.

I am not saying that public schools are outperforming private schools. Au contraire, I am not satisfied with my kids’ school and I am reevaluating options.[/quote]I never said we don’t have option. I just took offense to the claim that we have a lot of option. I’m fully aware of the socio-economic “special needs” you claim. Which is why I say the status quo isn’t working, at least for people who are not rich. It gets even worse when you’re an immigrant who are not fully aware of the options and the language skills to navigate the system. Which is why I say we don’t have a lot of choice. It shouldn’t be that hard to choose a better school for your kid.

I’m fully aware we don’t have an option for paying our taxes. But that’s where our agreement ends. The status quo is that our tax $ goes to fund public education system. I would much rather our tax $ goes to fund the education of a child. I place the child’s education first, not the system that educated the child. If there’s a better system out there, it should be very easy for parents to choose the new system that does a better job.

I’m not saying all public school are bad, but there are some really bad public schools out there and the kids there are stuck because of where they live or their parent’s socio-economic situation. I want those kids to have a better option.

[CA renter]

[quote=livinincali]This article from 2007 says SDUSD spends 18% of it’s budget to support special needs. Of the total student population 12% have special needs. So if you work out the math a special needs kid gets about twice as much spending as the non special needs kid. It does have an impact but not a huge impact. If you had 10% of your school special needs and it took twice as much spending to educate them versus a regular kid, then you’d have to boost prices by 10% across the board. So any private school that costs less than a 10% discount to public education is doing a better job financially.

http://www.sandi.net/cms/lib/CA01001235/Centricity/Domain/155/relatedfiles/HehirReport/hehir_issues.pdf%5B/quote%5D

Those are just the “official” special ed students. There are many other students who require extensive resources: low SES students, ESL students, students with major behavioral issues (many of whom should be classified as special ed), etc.

In many public schools, these types of students make up 80-90%+ of the student population. Then, you also have the high student turnover rate in many schools, where over half of your class turns over by the end of the year, and they are replaced by students from other schools or from other countries (oftentimes, they haven’t even attended much school because they come from small villages where children are expected to help their families with farm or other types of work).

I once had a class where two students (from different families, not related incidents) had watched their mothers get murdered in front of them. Other students lived in the local transient motel. Most of the students came from the projects that surrounded the school.

So, while private schools might look better on paper, they are NOT dealing with the same student populations. This will affect both the cost and the educational outcomes.

There ARE low-cost private and free public options available to poor people. Contrary to AN’s assertions, it is not difficult to navigate the system, even for poorer parents. All too often, they are so caught up in the drama of their own lives that they are unable to help their children more. For those who are willing and able to prioritize their child’s education, they will easily find a variety of options that are publicly funded or private options that are heavily subsidized (usually by churches).

[CA renter]

[quote=AN]We’re paying on par w/ some of the private school (excluding the elite LJCD, Bishops, etc). Those schools have class size that’s 1/2 of what the public school kids have to deal with. Why?

[/quote]

For one thing, Prop 30 has enabled many schools to bring back class size reduction.

http://www.dailynews.com/social-affairs/20131110/proposition-30-a-year-later-california-schools-seeing-benefits-of-tax-measure

——-

In San Diego, the union has been pushing for class size reduction, but the school board is fighting it. Not sure about the latest news, as this is a few months old.

The resolution was a deeply inadequate response to SDEA’s action at the Oct. 1 Board meeting, where roughly 150 union members packed the room to deliver a petition signed by nearly 2,000 members. The petition called on the Board to protect $20 million in state funding by immediately returning K-3 class size to 24:1. The state budget requires SDUSD to work towards a 24:1 K-3 student-to-teacher ratio. But Superintendent Cindy Marten and the School Board are moving in the opposite direction by increasing K-3 class size. Increasing K-3 class size could result in a loss of $20 million in state funding – and that’s bad for all students!

http://www.sdea.net/2013/10/district-doubles-down-on-larger-classes-members-fight-back/

——-

But many districts have already lowered class sizes, so private schools don’t have half the number of students (in many cases, class size is comparable).

Why did we lose class size reduction? Because the financial crisis hit all public agencies extremely hard. It’s pretty difficult to maintain services at a certain level when have record drops in revenue while demand for public services and welfare programs skyrocket.

The budget gaps result principally from weak tax collections. The Great Recession that started in 2007 caused the largest collapse in state revenues on record. Since bottoming out in 2010, revenues have begun to grow again but are still far from fully recovered. As of the first quarter of 2012, state revenues remained 5.5 percent below pre-recession levels, and are not growing fast enough to recover fully soon.

Meanwhile, states’ education and health care obligations continue to grow. States expect to educate 540,000 more K-12 students and 2.5 million more public college and university students in the upcoming school year than in 2007-08.[1] And some 4.8 million more people are projected to be eligible for subsidized health insurance through Medicaid in 2012 than were enrolled in 2008, as employers have cancelled their coverage and people have lost jobs and wages.[2]

http://www.cbpp.org/cms/?fa=view&id=711

[Author]

Posts