What should be cut first?

[tw1nsmom]

This isn't true. There is an iq cap, and other requirements that have to be met to be labeled gifted, and the tests have to be administered every so often to assure that the students still meet the requirements for services. When I was in public school, the cap was 120, and the student was also evaluated in the classroom and their standardized test scores were taken into account. We were reevaluated every two years, and had an IEP meeting every year. We were mainstreamed, with pull out sessions, and had constant access to a lab to work, instead of being in a classroom, if we so wanted.

The gifted standards are set out by the public laws i cited, and by the IDEA plan, from 04.

I'm sorry, but this is simply not true. IDEA does not provide protections or really anything for gifted children. The schools are in no way obligated to have a gifted program. The only way a child would qualify for a federally protected IEP would be to also have a disability that was included in the 13 categories in IDEA.
• autism;
• deaf-blindness;
• deafness;
• emotional disturbance;
• hearing impairment;
• mental retardation;
• multiple disabilities;
• orthopedic impairment;
• other health impairment;
• specific learning disability;
• speech or language impairment;
• traumatic brain injury; or
• visual impairment (including blindness).

Now, individual states may offer more services, but they are not obligated to do so and they are not protected under IDEA.

A high IQ is not in and of itself a learning disability. Those that have a high IQ and a disability may find it difficult to learn from the standard curriculum. However, those with just a high IQ should be offered as much enrichment as a district can afford and then it's the parents responsibility to offer enrichment outside of school.

And before anyone says anything about children with special needs having their parents pay for outside help, many of us who are fortunate enough to be able afford it already do so. We spend in excess of $5,000 a year on added therapy for DS. Many parents of special needs children practically bankrupt themselves paying for the services their children need (those that the schools are unable or refuse to provide).

Oh and just an FYI, I don't want to see education cut. I think it's short-sighted and will be detrimental to our society.

 

[DawnCt1]

Rework the contracts for all school employees, the administrators on down. Savings can be found in insurance policies with very small or no co-pays. Raise the co-pays so that they are more in line with what the private sector has. Evaluate the hours worked. The teachers at one school district recently wanted $100 per hour to stay after classes were dismissed. The supt. fired them all and rehired teachers that were willing to be fiscally reasonable and put in the extra hours. Benefits and retirement obligations that far exceed those in the public sector are killing state and town budget in many areas of the country. The need to be re-evaluated.

 

[golfgal]

Rework the contracts for all school employees, the administrators on down. Savings can be found in insurance policies with very small or no co-pays. Raise the co-pays so that they are more in line with what the private sector has. Evaluate the hours worked. The teachers at one school district recently wanted $100 per hour to stay after classes were dismissed. The supt. fired them all and rehired teachers that were willing to be fiscally reasonable and put in the extra hours. Benefits and retirement obligations that far exceed those in the public sector are killing state and town budget in many areas of the country. The need to be re-evaluated.

My health plan is significantly better then what the school district offers. It is falsely assumed that all school district health plans are good and expensive. Yes, some districts do have good health plans but YOUR company could offer the same health plan if it chose, at a similar price. Don't blame the teachers for your employers decision to be cheep.

Those teachers that were fired were being asked to put in an extra 15 hours/WEEK, not just an hour a day. The real issue there was that they were being held responsible for kids that were failing and even if they had agreed to all the extra help it wouldn't have made a difference what so ever and they STILL would have been fired.

There are many, many, many companies in the public sector that offer pension plans, FULLY FUNDED by the employer. Around here teachers have to PAY INTO their pension plans in order to get it so they are not free. My husband's company puts in 4% of his gross into his pension plan AND matches 6% on his 401K-teachers don't get anything close to this. DH's old company-before they got bought out-put 15% of his gross into his retirement plan.

Yes, teachers get summers off but they work more hours in a typical school day then most people do in the private sector so if you average out their hours they are working close to what people do in the private sector. People falsely assume that since school is from 8-3 each day, that is all teachers work. Again, shadow a teacher and see just how wrong you are.

 

[DawnCt1]

My health plan is significantly better then what the school district offers. It is falsely assumed that all school district health plans are good and expensive. Yes, some districts do have good health plans but YOUR company could offer the same health plan if it chose, at a similar price. Don't blame the teachers for your employers decision to be cheep.

Those teachers that were fired were being asked to put in an extra 15 hours/WEEK, not just an hour a day. The real issue there was that they were being held responsible for kids that were failing and even if they had agreed to all the extra help it wouldn't have made a difference what so ever and they STILL would have been fired.

There are many, many, many companies in the public sector that offer pension plans, FULLY FUNDED by the employer. Around here teachers have to PAY INTO their pension plans in order to get it so they are not free. My husband's company puts in 4% of his gross into his pension plan AND matches 6% on his 401K-teachers don't get anything close to this. DH's old company-before they got bought out-put 15% of his gross into his retirement plan.

Yes, teachers get summers off but they work more hours in a typical school day then most people do in the private sector so if you average out their hours they are working close to what people do in the private sector. People falsely assume that since school is from 8-3 each day, that is all teachers work. Again, shadow a teacher and see just how wrong you are.

You are speaking for your school district. Ct. and New York are some of the highest paying states in the country. The benefits are wonderful. Each state and school district needs to evaluate their contracts and how much money they have to spend. There is a finite pot of money.

 

[golfgal]

You are speaking for your school district. Ct. and New York are some of the highest paying states in the country. The benefits are wonderful. Each state and school district needs to evaluate their contracts and how much money they have to spend. There is a finite pot of money.

They are also 2 of the most expensive states to live in, factor in COL and the teachers aren't making any more there then they are elsewhere.

Also, why would you want to deny teachers a good benefit package? How about if your husband's hospital cuts the benefits for their employees, especially the doctors, because they charge so much for their services and they could cut costs that way. Sounds like a good plan to me, right?

Yes, there is a finite pot of money and unfortunately teachers have no control over that yet they are expected to take all the blame and shoulder the consequences. Schools are not in the position to "make money". They can't charge kids more to attend (public schools) to raise funds. As costs go up, budgets need to increase to meet those costs yet year after year after year schools are forced to lower their budgets and make cuts because the ignorant public thinks that schools are immune to inflation. Just increased gas prices alone are enough to throw off a district budget because they are so tight. Again, you can't have it both ways, either you put your money where your mouth is and fully fund schools or you suffer with crappy schools.

 

[friend of pooh]

To the people who are suggesting cuts in teacher salaries/benefits:

Don't you want the best to teach your children and other youth? Do you really think that the best will be attracted to low salaries and crappy benefits? To get the best you need to have to make them want to teach there.

How many of you have been in a school to actually see what happens since you yourself graduated? It is drastically different than even just 10 yrs ago. Kids are different, demands are different, laws are different.

Those that feel that teachers should do more with less money a la RI , if your boss told you to work 3-4 days a week more than you do now with no extra pay, are you telling me you would be ok with it? Teachers routinely work outside contracted work hours by choice, but to require it with no compensation is ridiculous.

Whoever said their district got rid of the planning period for teachers, how is that good? When will they be able to contact parents, discuss needs of students with other teachers to get the student the services he/she needs, or actually plan? Planning isn't just a 5 minute thing. Many times planning includes finding or making materials, not just writing p.52. Objectives and standards must also be determined.

Education is not the cushy job that some make it out to be. The cuts need to come from outside of education.

 

[PlutoPony]

I also think high school sports could be made 'pay to play' with scholarships for kids who qualify.

This is what's proposed in next year's budget for our school system. They're talking $50 per sport at the middle school level and $100 at the high schools. The downside is that it will most likely hurt the non-cut sports most like cross country and track so in the end there will less participation by students who aren't "good" in sports. But overall it's probably as fair as anything else given the budget situation.

And this is a very large school system of almost 80k students so you're talking some serious money generated in this way.

 

[golfgal]

This is what's proposed for in next year's budget for our school system. They're talking $50 per sport at the middle school level and $100 at the high schools. The downside is that it will probably hurt the non-cut sports most like cross country and track so in the end there will likely be less participation. But overall it's probably as fair as anything else given the budget situation.

And this is a very large school system of almost 80k students so you're talking some serious money generated by this.

We have had athletic fees since I was in high school 100 years ago. I am surprised that other states don't have this. Our middle school also charges $50/sport. The high school fees are graduated and sport dependent. If you are in 9th grade you pay $70 for all sports no matter what level you are at (but assuming most are only playing at the 9th grade level), 10-12th grade it is 85-125 depending on the sport (hockey and football have the highest fees). We have booster clubs for the sports that help fund raise for uniforms, extra fees, etc. For the golf team the kids buy their own uniforms each year. We get a pretty good deal from the company they use-this year for DD14 the varsity uniform is 2 shirts (home and away), a cap and a fleece jacket for $80.

We have 175 boys and 125 girls out for our track team this spring. There are 44 boys and 40 girls out for the golf team. Softball and baseball have a varsity, junior varsity, 10th grade and 2 9th grade teams. fees haven't hurt this at all. We have about 2000 kids in our high school.

A neighboring town has a $320 fee/sport with no family cap.

We have an 95% participation rate in after school activities in our district-95% of the students are either in sports, music or other clubs--WHY would you want to eliminate that????

 

[DawnCt1]

To the people who are suggesting cuts in teacher salaries/benefits:

Don't you want the best to teach your children and other youth? Do you really think that the best will be attracted to low salaries and crappy benefits? To get the best you need to have to make them want to teach there.

How many of you have been in a school to actually see what happens since you yourself graduated? It is drastically different than even just 10 yrs ago. Kids are different, demands are different, laws are different.

Those that feel that teachers should do more with less money a la RI , if your boss told you to work 3-4 days a week more than you do now with no extra pay, are you telling me you would be ok with it? Teachers routinely work outside contracted work hours by choice, but to require it with no compensation is ridiculous.

Whoever said their district got rid of the planning period for teachers, how is that good? When will they be able to contact parents, discuss needs of students with other teachers to get the student the services he/she needs, or actually plan? Planning isn't just a 5 minute thing. Many times planning includes finding or making materials, not just writing p.52. Objectives and standards must also be determined.

Education is not the cushy job that some make it out to be. The cuts need to come from outside of education.

Everyone wants the best for everyone but the reality is, there has to be a way to pay for it. Pay for play for sports? I am fine with that. But if you look at some northeastern states, 60% of income in some brackets are going to taxes. Ct. has become a very expensive state to do business in. As a result, one of Ct's biggest employers is sending work out of state to more business friendly states. 169 Pratt and Whitney employers will be losing their jobs in Cheshire, Ct because the work is being sent to Georgia. The Ct. AG is planning to sue UTC for closing the plant. That will sure make other employers consider Ct. in the future. How many states right now don't have a huge deficit? Only two, maybe three that I can think of. Every other state is under water. Towns are facing deficits but nobody will give up anything. There is just more demand for money.

 

[golfgal]

Everyone wants the best for everyone but the reality is, there has to be a way to pay for it. Pay for play for sports? I am fine with that. But if you look at some northeastern states, 60% of income in some brackets are going to taxes. Ct. has become a very expensive state to do business in. As a result, one of Ct's biggest employers is sending work out of state to more business friendly states. 169 Pratt and Whitney employers will be losing their jobs in Cheshire, Ct because the work is being sent to Georgia. The Ct. AG is planning to sue UTC for closing the plant. That will sure make other employers consider Ct. in the future. How many states right now don't have a huge deficit? Only two, maybe three that I can think of. Every other state is under water. Towns are facing deficits but nobody will give up anything. There is just more demand for money.

I am sorry but BS. There is no WAY 60% of ANYONE'S income is going to taxes, if they are they seriously need to contact a tax attorney or financial planner because the highest tax rate in the US is 48% and that is for estate taxes so even THAT isn't close to 60%. CT doesn't even make the top 5 for highest taxed states.

http://www.e50plus.com/public/202.cfm

 

[DawnCt1]

I am sorry but BS. There is no WAY 60% of ANYONE'S income is going to taxes, if they are they seriously need to contact a tax attorney or financial planner because the highest tax rate in the US is 48% and that is for estate taxes so even THAT isn't close to 60%. CT doesn't even make the top 5 for highest taxed states.

http://www.e50plus.com/public/202.cfm

In New York City; absolutely. Between income, city, state and federal, property taxes, sales taxes, gas taxes, 60% may become a modest estimate.The rest of the state is not much better. Other northeastern states are not far behind. Consider New Jersey. Under the proposed tax plan;

New York tax filers reporting more than $375,000 a year in earned income may end up paying nearly 60% of their wages in taxes to the government http://www.nysun.com/new-york/tax-rates-for-new-yorkers-would-top-50-under-obama/82191/

 

[golfgal]

In New York City; absolutely. Between income, city, state and federal, property taxes, sales taxes, gas taxes, 60% may become a modest estimate.The rest of the state is not much better. Other northeastern states are not far behind. Consider New Jersey. Under the proposed tax plan;

Again, BS--if they are paying 60% in taxes they need to see a financial planner.

 

[DawnCt1]

Again, BS--if they are paying 60% in taxes they need to see a financial planner.

I am sure at that income level, they have financial planners and have taken their advice; MOVE! What many have done have leave NYC and leave the state. If you look, you will see that New York and New Jersey have had a "wealth" drain. The wealthy, have voted with their feet and those states are paying the price. So the questions remain; How will towns and municipalities function without an influx of money? Where will the money come from? How much more in taxes can the taxpayer pay? What should be cut?

Boston College Study Shows $70 Billion in Wealth Leaving New Jersey
02.04.10, 10:05 AM EST
pic

BusinessWire - Boston College's Center on Wealth and Philanthropy today released a study showing that from 2004 through 2008, $70 billion dollars in wealth left New Jersey, while the state's charitable capacity declined by $1.13 billion.

http://www.forbes.com/feeds/businesswire/2010/02/04/businesswire134950502.html

 

[dsny1mom]

So, you want to extend the teacher's school day for meetings, yet they are cutting so they would be expected to do this for free?

Unfortunately people are sadly ignorant about what really goes on in schools. I suggest for all those that think schools are such a waste of money go spend a week shadowing a teacher and find out what REALLY goes on during a typical school day and all the BS teachers put up with and THEN come back here and tell us how easy their job is and how overpaid they are.

For all those that want to cut everything out of schools, you better not post again about how ill-prepared your employees are or how horrible kids are these days as well. You can't have it both ways.

Teaching is a salaried position. Salaried positions require an employee to work whatever hours are necessary to complete the job. If a teacher is required to work more hours they are not being expected to do so for free, it's part of their salareid position.

I don't need to shadow a teacher to know what one in my area *goes through* nor am I sadly ignorant about the teaching profession. My next door neighbor teaches HS math and I have a teacher that works for me very PT to get our lucrative discount and they both talk freely about their teaching positions. They get the occasional unreasonable parent but nothing more difficult than what other professionals have to deal with with dissatisfied customers.

My employee teaches in a very nice suburban district. Her students are with her 9-3. She is required to be in the building by 8:30 and isn't suppossed to leave before 4:00 (although she says it isn't uncommon for teachers to leave shortly after the students are dismissed). That's a 7 hour day at most. She occasionally brings work home but most professionals in other fields do this, as well . Add in all the time off not to mention no nights or weekends (with the exception of parent teacher conferances 4 x a year) and her 70K (as an elementary level teacher) ends up being approx. $50 an hour. After 25 years of teaching she will collect approx 80% of her pay in retirement. My neighbor as a HS teacher earns considerably more in her postiion and is home daily by 3pm.

I do appreciate what teachers do, just like I appreciate what all working people do, and I know that starting pay for teachers isn't 70K but most professions don't pay that at entry level either. Several of my children's friends have only been teachers a couple of years and their average salary is approx 45K. That makes their hourly pay around $32 an hour.Teachers also have the abilty to earn stipends for coaching, leading clubs etc. I feel teachers in my area are compensated very well. Not to mention people going into the teaching profession know upfront what the avearge pay for their area is and how many actual days they have to show up for that salary. If budgets need to be cut I see no reason why teachers should be protected from the difficult times the reast of society is dealing with. I'm not saying their pay should be cut but they certainly could be expected to work an 8 hour day without feeling short changed.

I do agree people can't have it both ways. That goes for teachers too.

I do have a suggestion for cutting costs in schools. Get rid of the teachers unions accross the country. It will save money for everyone, teachers included, and then teachers, like the rest of the American workers, not protected by unions, will be promoted, given raises, or terminated based on their preformance.

dsny1mom

 

[HsvTeacher]

Do away with the massive pay-outs for unused sick and vacation time that so many administrators seem to get. Why does there need to be a superintendent, two assistants superintendents, a principal in every building with at least one assistant principal (often two?) If a married couple teach in the same district, only one should be eligible for benefits (family plan) and the other should NOT receive financial remuneration for the benefits. Part time workers (cafeteria workers, etc.) should not be eligible for benefits or be eligible for pensions. I live in NJ, and the benefits in our educational system are often abused..a local superintendent retired last year and got close to $200,000 in sick and vacation day pay, and this was NOT the highest pay-out of its kind in our state. The spouse of a fellow teacher gets $$$ for not taking benefits even though their husband/wife is in the same system and a family plan covers the family.

I totally disagree with this! My DH and I work for the same system, and we combine our single allocations, so we do not have to pay for insurance. (We do not receive a payout for the difference.) If we had kids, we would need to buy a family plan and pay the difference. Why should one of us not receive the same benefits as everyone else in the state?

Today, under P.L.102-119, all schools must offer special educational services to eligible 3-21 year old individuals with disabilities.

If the school system doesn't offer a quality education, not only do they have to send the child to a qualified school, they have to foot the bill.

I honestly cannot fathom that anyone believes that cutting special ed is the way to trim fat out of a budget. That is the most disgusting thing I've ever heard on this forum.

I'm pretty sure it's illegal to deny a worker benefits, or even to alter the benefits available, based on marital status.
As long as this same (payout) option is available to any employee - they can choose a benefits payout instead of the benefit - you can't deny it to an employee whose spouse works there, too.

No, on both counts. Five percent is still five percent. That money can be used to retain teachers. A local city's current (FY 2010) school system budget is $133,563,880. Five percent of that is $6,678,194.

tasha99 does a good job of explaining why cutting special education (especially instead of competititive sports?) makes little, if any, sense.

It is illegal.

I would cut all the inservice days for the teachers that require them to leave the classroom for the day. The students watch movies, waste time and it really wastes money to pay for the sub. Then they load them up with homework to make up the work. This happened to several classes this week, teachers out for 2 days.

If this is happening, I would complain. When I'm out for anything, personal or professional, I leave detailed lesson plans so the class can go on without me. (I'm talking pages and pages of plans.) That way, I can pick right back up when I get back, and the kids haven't lost any days of instruction.

 

[DawnCt1]

Teaching is a salaried position. Salaried positions require an employee to work whatever hours are necessary to complete the job. If a teacher is required to work more hours they are not being expected to do so for free, it's part of their salareid position.

I don't need to shadow a teacher to know what one in my area *goes through* nor am I sadly ignorant about the teaching profession. My next door neighbor teaches HS math and I have a teacher that works for me very PT to get our lucrative discount and they both talk freely about their teaching positions. They get the occasional unreasonable parent but nothing more difficult than what other professionals have to deal with with dissatisfied customers.

My employee teaches in a very nice suburban district. Her students are with her 9-3. She is required to be in the building by 8:30 and isn't suppossed to leave before 4:00 (although she says it isn't uncommon for teachers to leave shortly after the students are dismissed). That's a 7 hour day at most. She occasionally brings work home but most professionals in other fields do this, as well . Add in all the time off not to mention no nights or weekends (with the exception of parent teacher conferances 4 x a year) and her 70K (as an elementary level teacher) ends up being approx. $50 an hour. After 25 years of teaching she will collect approx 80% of her pay in retirement. My neighbor as a HS teacher earns considerably more in her postiion and is home daily by 3pm.

I do appreciate what teachers do, just like I appreciate what all working people do, and I know that starting pay for teachers isn't 70K but most professions don't pay that at entry level either. Several of my children's friends have only been teachers a couple of years and their average salary is approx 45K. That makes their hourly pay around $32 an hour.Teachers also have the abilty to earn stipends for coaching, leading clubs etc. I feel teachers in my area are compensated very well. Not to mention people going into the teaching profession know upfront what the avearge pay for their area is and how many actual days they have to show up for that salary. If budgets need to be cut I see no reason why teachers should be protected from the difficult times the reast of society is dealing with. I'm not saying their pay should be cut but they certainly could be expected to work an 8 hour day without feeling short changed.

I do agree people can't have it both ways. That goes for teachers too.

I do have a suggestion for cutting costs in schools. Get rid of the teachers unions accross the country. It will save money for everyone, teachers included, and then teachers, like the rest of the American workers, not protected by unions, will be promoted, given raises, or terminated based on their preformance.

dsny1mom

I don't think I could add a thing to your excellent post. I did think of one thing with regard to "professionalism". Years ago one of our DSs in 2nd grade, brought home a note, on a Friday regarding an incident at school that was upsetting to him. It was just before school vacation. He would have been very anxious waiting a week to have it addressed. I called the teacher at school but she had already left by the time the bus got home, so I called her at home, before 4 pm to ask her about the note. It was concerning enough to DS to warrant the call. She informed me that she was "on vacation" and it was "after school". I reminded her that she is a professional teacher, just as my DH was a professional physician, and he would never speak to a patient like that if there was a concern, and frankly I expected more from her. She apologized and addressed the issue.

 

[taylor3297]

Teaching is a salaried position. Salaried positions require an employee to work whatever hours are necessary to complete the job. If a teacher is required to work more hours they are not being expected to do so for free, it's part of their salareid position.

I don't need to shadow a teacher to know what one in my area *goes through* nor am I sadly ignorant about the teaching profession. My next door neighbor teaches HS math and I have a teacher that works for me very PT to get our lucrative discount and they both talk freely about their teaching positions. They get the occasional unreasonable parent but nothing more difficult than what other professionals have to deal with with dissatisfied customers.

My employee teaches in a very nice suburban district. Her students are with her 9-3. She is required to be in the building by 8:30 and isn't suppossed to leave before 4:00 (although she says it isn't uncommon for teachers to leave shortly after the students are dismissed). That's a 7 hour day at most. She occasionally brings work home but most professionals in other fields do this, as well . Add in all the time off not to mention no nights or weekends (with the exception of parent teacher conferances 4 x a year) and her 70K (as an elementary level teacher) ends up being approx. $50 an hour. After 25 years of teaching she will collect approx 80% of her pay in retirement. My neighbor as a HS teacher earns considerably more in her postiion and is home daily by 3pm.

I do appreciate what teachers do, just like I appreciate what all working people do, and I know that starting pay for teachers isn't 70K but most professions don't pay that at entry level either. Several of my children's friends have only been teachers a couple of years and their average salary is approx 45K. That makes their hourly pay around $32 an hour.Teachers also have the abilty to earn stipends for coaching, leading clubs etc. I feel teachers in my area are compensated very well. Not to mention people going into the teaching profession know upfront what the avearge pay for their area is and how many actual days they have to show up for that salary. If budgets need to be cut I see no reason why teachers should be protected from the difficult times the reast of society is dealing with. I'm not saying their pay should be cut but they certainly could be expected to work an 8 hour day without feeling short changed.

I do agree people can't have it both ways. That goes for teachers too.

I do have a suggestion for cutting costs in schools. Get rid of the teachers unions accross the country. It will save money for everyone, teachers included, and then teachers, like the rest of the American workers, not protected by unions, will be promoted, given raises, or terminated based on their preformance.

dsny1mom

I guess I was teaching in the wrong state. After 18 years of teaching I was only making 42K a year. The last year I taught (2009 - 2010) I spent 8K on classroom supplies/materials in order to create lessons that were fun and engaging. We are only alowed to take $250 deduction on our taxes.

My typical day was be at work at 7:30 and leave school at 4 in order to pick up my dd from school and son from daycare. After the kids were in bed, I would then work on more school work until midnight, sometimes 1 AM. I also spent most of my weekends doing work for school.

Yes I was a salaried employee with a contract. So, I did do what was necessary in order to provide. In the two different states where I have taught, neither had teacher unions.

So you can't judge all teachers from the 2 you know. Maybe these two aren't doing their jobs well.

 

[Magpie]

My son thinks schools should cut sports. My daughter thinks they should cut music.

Our board HAS cut special education and is trying hard to do away with the gifted program, too. The head of the board has a philosophical objection to individualized curriculum and feels all kids can and should be taught together in one "drive the teacher insane" lump.

(Yeah, I have a personal position on this!)

My son has a learning disability that entitles him to a laptop in order to "fully access the curriculum", which is his right. That was fine last year, but this year they decided they could save money by making the laptop he was provided with a "classroom resource". Now everyone gets to use it, which is great for the class, but not so good for my son. We tried to fight it, but ultimately we ended up buying a laptop for our son - because he couldn't struggle on for months without it while we argued with the school board.

When I was a child, I was given a free instrument to use at school. Now we have to buy them for our children, at a cost of between 400 to 800 dollars - or more. If you can't afford it, you have to provide the school with a statement of earnings and other personal information. The school will then decide, based on need, who gets one of the few school-owned instruments.

Oh, and you can't choose a cheaper instrument either, or even opt out of music instruction! The school tests your child and informs you what instrument they will play. So if your kid is told to play a trombone, then that's what you buy.

If my kids didn't love school as much as they do, I'd pull them out. They were getting a better academic education at home, back when we homeschooled. And it was cheaper!

Personally, if I could cut anything - I'd cut the school board. The teachers, the principals, they're all great. It's the bureaucrats we could all do without.

 

[HsvTeacher]

Here are some ways I would cut money:

1. Do away with our superintendent's car allowance due to an already absurdly high amount of salary. By cutting the car allowance, the system could afford the salary of an instructional assistant.

2. Only have one assistant superintendent. We currently have three. Our system is big, but not big enough for three assistants.

3. Only one shared administrative assistant for the superintendent and assistant superintendent(s).

4. Cut "curriculum specialist" jobs from the schools. They get paid an awfully big salary to chat and gossip all day. (Unfortunately, I believe they are paid from Title I money.)

5. Downsize the amount of reading coach positions. They have a lot of free time, and two or three schools could share a reading coach. (Our reading coach is always complaining that she is bored.)

6. Very, very little of our school budget is spent on sports, but what is spent should be pulled. Booster clubs fund most of our sports, so they would most likely be able to kick in the extra money.

7. Cut back in the maintenance departments. Do we really need two painters to paint a five-foot wall? Should it really take them (and I kid you not) a week to paint the five-foot wall?

8. Maintenance employees should not be allowed to drive service trucks home at night and on the weekend. If they are on call, they should drive there personal calls for the emergencies that NEVER happen.

9. Cut back on employees in the central office. Many of the departments are over-staffed, but for some reason, our system will not let any of them go.

10. Temporarily halt new building construction and use capital improvement/repairs money to make sure we have enough teachers for next year. What good is a new building if we don't have the teachers to staff it and the students to fill it? Does that wall really need to get painted?

11. Going along with the above statement, we wouldn't need new schools if our system would get out from under the federal desegregation order we have been under since the 60s. They would be able to redraw zone lines to fill empty buildings and alleviate overcrowding in the full ones. We would also be able to cut transportation costs, since we would no longer have to bus students across town. The city has self-segregated itself anyway, so the order is now useless.

12. Do away with or downsize bus service and charge for students who choose to go to schools out of their zone. (See above order) Our system pays $48,000 per bus route, some of which only carry ONE student. Some of them carry less than five students.

 

[dsny1mom]

I guess I was teaching in the wrong state. After 18 years of teaching I was only making 42K a year. The last year I taught (2009 - 2010) I spent 8K on classroom supplies/materials in order to create lessons that were fun and engaging. We are only alowed to take $250 deduction on our taxes.

My typical day was be at work at 7:30 and leave school at 4 in order to pick up my dd from school and son from daycare. After the kids were in bed, I would then work on more school work until midnight, sometimes 1 AM. I also spent most of my weekends doing work for school.

Yes I was a salaried employee with a contract. So, I did do what was necessary in order to provide. In the two different states where I have taught, neither had teacher unions.

So you can't judge all teachers from the 2 you know. Maybe these two aren't doing their jobs well.

I don't judge all teachers by the two I know. I clarified this by using the words "my area".

But you know taking jabs at other teacher's abilities do nothing to rectify the financial problems most school districts are dealing with.

I could easliy say to you, perhaps the teachers I know don't have to burn the midnight oil because they do their jobs so well. But I won't.

dsny1mom