Not sure if you want me to answer the question here or there. There are two issues accredidration and meeting state standards. Accredidation is done by an independent body and is voluntary; i,e, you don’t need to be accredited. The reason schools like to be accredited is so that colleges can have confidence in the trancripts. I imagine some of the bible schools have their own accrediting body. Both public and private schools have similar requiremnets to be accredited.
State standards are a legal requirement so that you can call yourself a school and so that parents who send their kids there aren’t accused of not sending their kids to school.
In Oregon, there were certain topics that needed be covered for particular grades. One of these was The Oregon Trail (in Massachsetts it’s probably the Red Sox and how to pronounce frappe). There were also requirements for how many hours of schooling, etc.
This is an enormously complex issue. As many have pointed out it is difficult to compare schools that have different student.
What I would like to get across is that the private/alternative school movement has its progressive proponents as well as conservative ones. When we were starting our school the issues of fairness, inclusiveness, scholarships for poor students, etc. were raised as much as issues such as what we should teach.
Very well, I will withdraw that assumption. I still do believe that many believe that one of the problems with our school system is how the money is spent, not how much is spent. Equalizing the funding between rich and poor schools (as mentioned earlier in the thread) is probably one of the best ideas for public education, and one that will likely lead to better results.
tomndebb brought up the voucher program in Cleveland earlier in the thread, and I found a study saying that the voucher schools perform “slightly, but statistically significantly, higher.” Of course, as predicted by the report, these scores have been used by bothsides. I am having a hard time imagining how the state spends more money on vouchers than on education, given that the vouchers are only worth $2,250 each. If anyone can explain this, I’d be much obliged.
For the record, I’m neither for nor against vouchers. If it turns out that they can provide for a better education, then I believe we should use them; if not, then we shouldn’t. I’m just waiting for evidence that shows that vouchers schools are either better, in most cases, than public schools, or equal to or worse than, in most cases, public schools.
But that’s a different problem, because money generally doesn’t go as far in urban areas. It is certainly true of this urban area. I could never dream of owning the house in here that I might be able to afford in Ohio… on the salary I make here.
Thank you for being reasonable. I will agree that many of the problems are caused by some poor school districts- the ones with the worst students- get crap for funding. No doubt. Is that a problem- or does it cause a problem? And what’s a good system for fixing it- something fair? Another thread for that.
If this table is to be believed, the District of Columbia has the highest per pupil expenditures in the nation, dropping $13,187 per pupil per year. Compare that with the lowest expenditure, $4,890, for Utah, which has (admittedly) a much less diverse student population statewide, but has considerably higher non-curricular costs. (Not to mention a considerably larger student population and many more school buildings.)
I can’t see how the state spends more money on vouchers than education either, assuming that tomndebb means they now spend more money on vouchers than education. I can , however, see how the vouchers + public schools cost more than just public schools did before the voucher program started-
over 10% of the kids receiving vouchers weren’t in public schools to begin with
there will be costs to administer the voucher program
We don’t know how much money was saved by losing about 3500 students. Depends on the the distribution of the students who left. If the district was able to close down a couple of schools, it would save most of the actual cost of educating those pupils. If it was able to at least eliminate a few classes, it still might save a quite a bit. But assuming the program is open to students from K-12, if the students were distibuted fairly evenly across the grades, that’s about 26 students per grade leaving. The school district has an enrollment of about 65,000- 26 students per grade most likely wouldn’t allow even a single class to be eliminated, much less a school. That means the district would only save the incremental cost per student- the costs involved in adding a single student to a pre-existing class. The district wouldn’t save on salaries, benefits,utilities, maintainance or any of the big ticket expenses.
I have no problem believing that table. But it doesn’t give the per pupil expenditure for the Death Valley school district. It gives state averages.NY’s average is $11,546, but there are districts that spend over $15,000 per student.
erislover makes a good point. I live and work in NYC. Since I work for a state agency, I will get roughly the same amount of money no matter where in the state I work ( I get about 1000/yr in location pay).The people working downstate want to transfer upstate and the people upstate won’t take promotions downstate because the standard of living on the same salary is so different. For what my NYC house ( three small bedrooms, one and a half baths, no garage and a 20x100 lot) is worth, I could buy a 5 bedroom, 4 bath house with a 3 car garage on a much larger piece of property in Rochester or Buffalo.
