PDA

View Full Version : Referendum 1



Sombeech
10-08-2007, 10:44 PM
I posted this in the Political thread also, but I'm just a little confused.

The 2 top complaints I hear is about cutting funds, and large class size.

Am I missing something?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yL9YIu20_g4

ericchile
10-09-2007, 07:01 AM
I think its a good commercial and reflects on why this vote is more about power then money at all.

The only thing they don't mention is that after 5 years that extra 4k gets taken away from the school as well.

For me this is a tough decision and I am split. One hand you have the powerful UEA who doesn't want you to have choice in who educates your kids, makes firing bad teachers near impossible and wants to bully any other system out.

On the other hand you have rich private schools that merely want to pick and choose who to educate, and care mostly about the almighty dollar. All while the rich get a refund from driving their children 10 miles everyday in their Hummers.

All I want is a school system that isn't treated as a day care for some while others are trying to educate their children for the future. A school system where only those who pay in benefit. Not a school where class size doubles because of an influx of illegal immigrants.



On a side note... at the elementary school where my kid attends they had to put an ESL teacher on the school bus because they decided that those kids were keeping the school from meeting its goals and funding requirements.

The system is broke... lets fix it (but I'm not sure vouchers are the answer).

Sombeech
10-09-2007, 07:21 AM
The only thing they don't mention is that after 5 years that extra 4k gets taken away from the school as well.

So the extra 4k (if the voucher was 3k) gets taken away after 5 years? Hmm, interesting.

cmpbiker
10-09-2007, 07:59 AM
Rant mode on:

I find this video insidious, misstating the financial implications and over simplifying the matter. The funding for the vouchers comes from the general fund not the education bucket so we in fact are paying extra for the voucher money. After 5 years the funding will go back to a per student basis so there will be a net lose to the public schools.

Whatever your opinion on the UEA and NEA you can not discount that we pay less per pupil then almost all states. I absolutely do not trust our legislature and would not be surprised that if this passed the referendum they wouldn't pull some background shenanigans to alter the funding. If they want to talk about public money to fund private schools the first thing I require is that we at least spend the median on public schools, then we can talk.

Besides funding the issue of the quality of education is another matter. Currently when we think about private schools we have images of Waterford or Rowland Hall which are very nice schools. The provisions for funding basically come down to a school in a non-home building that employs teachers. I would qualify as a teacher. I am pretty sure that the polygamist schools count, I am pretty sure that if I wanted to get some space and start my school teaching the dogma of the Flying Spaghetti Monster (blessed is is sauce) I could get the funds. I can pack 90 kids into a storage unit teach them that in the beginning there was a hill, a tree and a midget and stuff $270k in my pocket.

Here is how to understand the Utah Legislature in short form- When a bill is passed its because cronies are going to make money from it. Follow the money folks.

Rant mode off:

ericchile
10-09-2007, 09:55 AM
After 5 years the funding will go back to a per student basis so there will be a net lose to the public schools.


Sure why do you expect schools to keep getting paid for children they don't teach? I think 5 years is generous.



Whatever your opinion on the UEA and NEA you can not discount that we pay less per pupil then almost all states.

Utahn's make much less then the national average. I wonder if our administrative costs per school is the same as the national average.



I can pack 90 kids into a storage unit teach them that in the beginning there was a hill, a tree and a midget and stuff $270k in my pocket.

You forget that these children have parents who are making the decision of where to educate their children. Your living in a fantasy world if you don't think that parents who chose private education don't monitor the progress of their children. This sounds like the commercials I am hearing from the UEA.




Here is how to understand the Utah Legislature in short form- When a bill is passed its because cronies are going to make money from it. Follow the money folks

This I agree with... But there is money and power on both ends. Lets face it, someone is pulling the ear of Government on both ends. But how many times has this bill come up, and how long has it taken to get passed? I think around 6 years

The public education system is only as good as the whole. From what I have seen... I want better for my kids.

cmpbiker
10-09-2007, 01:07 PM
You forget that these children have parents who are making the decision of where to educate their children. Your living in a fantasy world if you don't think that parents who chose private education don't monitor the progress of their children. This sounds like the commercials I am hearing from the UEA.


You are exactly right, parents do make decisions on where to educate their children. If you think that the only reason parents choose a private school is to get a better education, think again. For quite a few parents private schools mean a closed environment where diversity is not present. Many parents feel that they do not want their children corrupted by the outside world and choose to educate them in a sterile environment based on traditional religious teachings. Thats great, I just don't want my tax dollars promoting such teachings. Not if its Muslim, Christian, Jewish or in my case Monsteriasm. Really simple, do you want your tax dollars funding a Polygamist School? [/quote]

ericchile
10-09-2007, 01:30 PM
You forget that these children have parents who are making the decision of where to educate their children. Your living in a fantasy world if you don't think that parents who chose private education don't monitor the progress of their children. This sounds like the commercials I am hearing from the UEA.


You are exactly right, parents do make decisions on where to educate their children. If you think that the only reason parents choose a private school is to get a better education, think again. For quite a few parents private schools mean a closed environment where diversity is not present. Many parents feel that they do not want their children corrupted by the outside world and choose to educate them in a sterile environment based on traditional religious teachings. Thats great, I just don't want my tax dollars promoting such teachings. Not if its Muslim, Christian, Jewish or in my case Monsteriasm. Really simple, do you want your tax dollars funding a Polygamist School? [/quote]

Actually its their own tax dollars... if they paid 7k into the system why shouldn't they be able to get 3k out? Since when is all the money paid by taxes just your tax money?

I don't know of any polygamist schools... just schools in at polygamist setting. I bet they teach math and reading there too! Just because a school is more or less diversified in ethnicity doesn't mean its better...

Your bringing up extreme cases, but I don't see how it has to do with the fact that parents should be able to educate their kids at the school they like, and if they are paying taxes like the rest of us, they should be able to choose where those funds are placed.

James_B_Wads2000
10-09-2007, 03:12 PM
All I want is a school system that isn't treated as a day care for some while others are trying to educate their children for the future. A school system where only those who pay in benefit. Not a school where class size doubles because of an influx of illegal immigrants.

Yes, yes, yes it is about time we identify the real culprit here. Because it is obvious that the increase in class sizes has nothing to do with the growing

CarpeyBiggs
10-09-2007, 03:37 PM
Wow, I missed this video. I added my two bits in the political forum. Perhaps we can consolidate these two threads and continue talking about it? It's a tough issue...

I'm personally against vouchers, but I am leaving the door open to hear both sides, because education has got to be our top priority for local government.

I watched an interesting program on school vouchers yesterday. Dr. Byrne and Representative Allen debated for an hour their respective views. I walked away feeling like vouchers were a bad idea.

CarpeyBiggs
10-09-2007, 04:20 PM
Your bringing up extreme cases, but I don't see how it has to do with the fact that parents should be able to educate their kids at the school they like, and if they are paying taxes like the rest of us, they should be able to choose where those funds are placed.

I agree with you on this point, but here is my issue with the reasoning. There is a historical precedent for public money to stay in public education. It took an enormous amount of money to get the system up and running, and there is ridiculous amounts of money invested. Some money is diverted to private interests, and some to public. And private interests don't hold the interests of the whole as a priority, they are PRIVATELY held. If we suddenly allow people to start choosing where to place their money for the education, the system has the potential to come crumbling down. If that happens, what will the entire public do? It could mean the privatization of education, and the historical precedent of equal educational opportunities for all will be significantly changed.

Will it be for the betterment of future educations? Maybe so. This could be a precedent that could make or break the future of education.

If it were so obvious to answer "YES," then I think the program would be worth voting for. Look at how controversial this is. It is hardly cut and dry. There are so many unanswered questions, that I think the kinks still need to be worked out, BEFORE implementation. That's the prudent choice, vote "NO" now, and let's continue to work towards solutions that are better, or at least more predictable.

cmpbiker
10-09-2007, 06:32 PM
Actually its their own tax dollars... if they paid 7k into the system why shouldn't they be able to get 3k out? Since when is all the money paid by taxes just your tax money?


I apologize for not being clear, I hastily wrote the last reply. When I speak of taxes in the terms of my, yours etc it means the taxpayer in general. I was always led to believe that education is an investment in the infrastructure of our community. It is necessary for society to see to it that all of its members are educated and capable of leading productive lives. If it came down to a person wanting to direct taxes at personal whim it flies in the face of community responsibility. This example of "directing my money how I see fit" would enable childless taxpayers to stop funding. It is the first step in stopping spending for the common good and heading towards a usage based government. And that is a discussion for another thread.

Back to this subject, I said it before, when the Utah legislature sees to it to fund our public school system to an adequate level we can have a talk. This option is not about bettering our public schools no matter what the propaganda says.

CarpeyBiggs
10-09-2007, 07:09 PM
I apologize for not being clear, I hastily wrote the last reply. When I speak of taxes in the terms of my, yours etc it means the taxpayer in general. I was always led to believe that education is an investment in the infrastructure of our community. It is necessary for society to see to it that all of its members are educated and capable of leading productive lives. If it came down to a person wanting to direct taxes at personal whim it flies in the face of community responsibility. This example of "directing my money how I see fit" would enable childless taxpayers to stop funding. It is the first step in stopping spending for the common good and heading towards a usage based government. And that is a discussion for another thread.


Well said. Now when do I get to learn about this special sauce?

Sombeech
10-09-2007, 09:26 PM
For some reason, people think vouchers are in OPPOSITION to Public Schools. If this were the case, the student would get ALL $7k, instead of BETWEEN $500 - $3000. (The average may only be lower than $2000!)

Cut and dried, this leaves the remainder of the money towards a SMALLER class. Smaller Classroom + more money per student

So they'll cut the funding in 5 years? I'm curious why they'll wait that long. How long should we pay for students who have left the Public School?

Every article/comic/ad that I've seen against the vouchers are explaining that the Gov't is turning it's back on Public Schools. WTF??? I guess it's the only way to make parents paranoid, that their kid will have less of a budget somehow?

Forget these stupid hypothetical situations. Look at the facts. Smaller class sizes (#1 teacher's wish) and more funding per student (#2 teacher's wish).

In which other way do we propose to accomplish these tasks? I work for the public school system, and these vouchers would give us a bigger budget per student.

CarpeyBiggs
10-09-2007, 09:28 PM
For some reason, people think vouchers are in OPPOSITION to Public Schools. If this were the case, the student would get ALL $7k, instead of BETWEEN $500 - $3000. (The average may only be lower than $2000!)

Cut and dried, this leaves the remainder of the money towards a SMALLER class. Smaller Classroom + more money per student

So they'll cut the funding in 5 years? I'm curious why they'll wait that long. How long should we pay for students who have left the Public School?

Every article/comic/ad that I've seen against the vouchers are explaining that the Gov't is turning it's back on Public Schools. WTF??? I guess it's the only way to make parents paranoid, that their kid will have less of a budget somehow?

Forget these stupid hypothetical situations. Look at the facts. Smaller class sizes (#1 teacher's wish) and more funding per student (#2 teacher's wish).

In which other way do we propose to accomplish these tasks? I work for the public school system, and these vouchers would give us a bigger budget per student.

Read my posts in the political forum.

BTW, what do the teachers at your schools say? For or against?

Sombeech
10-09-2007, 09:39 PM
BTW, what do the teachers at your schools say? For or against?

I think any discussion about this at school is highly secretive. But by the little comic strips I see hanging in the lounge, they're against it.

I just don't understand what they want. Smaller classes, more money. This is what they want. This is what the voucher gives them.

They are "indoctrinated" with the notion that vouchers take money away from the public school system.

If this is true, they can also say that about somebody who moves. Moving takes money out of the public school system, because they don't get funding for a student who isn't there.

CarpeyBiggs
10-09-2007, 09:53 PM
I think any discussion about this at school is highly secretive. But by the little comic strips I see hanging in the lounge, they're against it.
Yep. I imagine they are mostly against it. You ever wondered why?

Teachers are in a terribly difficult situation right now in Utah. The voucher system would just be a veneer that can cover a whole bunch of issues that are negatively affecting teachers. You should talk to a teacher you respect tomorrow at school, and see what they think about the current system. Don't even ask them about vouchers. Chances are, they'll tell you they are expected to do more, with less time, and be more spectacular than ever, all the while being bound by nonsense like "no child left behind" and other bureaucratic hassles. The teachers don't just teach now. They are benchmarked, programmed, pressured, etc... And the pay is only one of the rubs. Most will tell you the system is failing. But if you keep listening, they'll also tell you that vouchers aren't the answers.

To them, vouchers is just another way of everyone saying that public schools suck, the teachers are ineffective, and we need to get kids out of there.

But yet, in all of this discussion, nobody wants to talk to the teachers, because they are characterized as the problem. In reality, the problem lies with the system, and we need to fix that. Vouchers just gives kids with means to attend private school even more of a way to get out, so in effect, the rich get richer, and those left behind get left even further behind.

That's what the teacher's are scared of. That's why they resort to saying their being turned on by the legislature. To them, the system is the problem, and the legislature is the system. Instead of fixing it, they are going to divert there attention to vouchers.



I just don't understand what they want. Smaller classes, more money. This is what they want. This is what the voucher gives them.
This isn't always true. This won't necessarily make classes smaller, nor distribute more money to each student. Read some of my posts in the political forum, I try to explain this.



They are "indoctrinated" with the notion that vouchers take money away from the public school system.
And you have been "indoctrinated" with the notion that vouchers will solve these problems. Like I've said in other posts, both sides paint the other side in unfavorable light. My bet is that the middle ground is probably accurate. Per-pupil spending will not change significantly with vouchers. It will not be a huge savings for the state, nor a large expenditure. It will just be another fairly ineffective means of education reform, without solving any of the real issues.

Sombeech
10-09-2007, 10:00 PM
You should talk to a teacher you respect tomorrow at school, and see what they think about the current system.

This is what they say: Largest classrooms in america, lowest budget in america.

CarpeyBiggs
10-09-2007, 10:10 PM
This is what they say: Largest classrooms in america, lowest budget in america.

I didn't mean for it to be rhetorical... I mean you should seriously ask a well respected teacher what they think.

In more seriousness, we should consolidate these two threads.

ericchile
10-10-2007, 06:16 AM
I agree with you on this point, but here is my issue with the reasoning. There is a historical precedent for public money to stay in public education. It took an enormous amount of money to get the system up and running, and there is ridiculous amounts of money invested.

If it were so obvious to answer "YES," then I think the program would be worth voting for. Look at how controversial this is. It is hardly cut and dry. There are so many unanswered questions, that I think the kinks still need to be worked out, BEFORE implementation. That's the prudent choice, vote "NO" now, and let's continue to work towards solutions that are better, or at least more predictable.

Man I agree with you here. I have nothing against the idea of public education. And with our forefathers it worked great. I grew up in So. California and went through public eduction there. I saw so many things start to go wrong there it's not funny. Now no one wants their kids to go to public schools because of lack of funding and poor teaching levels.

So the BIG question is this. Can we take back our schools? Can we make them what we expect from private schools?

My biggest complaint is this.. In public schools a lot of kids have parents that don't care one bit what they are doing. Sometimes their parents don't even pay taxes. Because of programs like NoChildLeftBehind schools spend all the time making up for whats not taught in the home. In public schools parents are typically much more involved and fund the school directly.

I have a new Program its called NoParentLeftBehind... it takes tax breaks away from parents who's kids don't perform in school and puts it back into the school.

CarpeyBiggs
10-10-2007, 06:38 AM
NoParentLeftBehind.... I like it. Wonder if Bush will put that together before he leaves office...