Home-schooled girl fights for band spot

[Giannawannabe]

john1863:

Steve,
Thank you for cutting to the chase.
In my opinion if someone chooses to send a child to a private school…fine…just don’t expect everyone else to fund that choice.
That goes for any private shool…religious, secular, military.

John

I may be wrong, but I don’t think anyone was saying that private school kids should be able to opt into public school extracurriculars. The thread was about a homeschooled girl trying to opt into band. The private schools around here have their own band, art, music, sports programs, computers, etc.

Just wanted to clarify.

 

[ChrisR246]

Adonis33:

What I think most people do not understand - is tha we get federal money based on our school population. Correct me if I’m wrong - but the tax money is for the school buildings - not programs. Youtax dollars entitles you to use the cfacilities - but not be involved with the extra curricular activities.

Any and all money for public schools comes from taxes - either property taxes or state or federal income taxes. Taxes are the only means the government has for collecting the money it doles out. (Besides creating it out of thin air via the fiat system in place, but thats a whole 'nother discussion)

I don’t recall any line on the 1040 that allows for deduction of tuition to a private/parochial school or for home schooling, is there? If not, then these parents are paying for any and all activities that take place in their local public school. If the school is not getting the credit because the child is not attending, then that needs to be changed, because the parent is paying for it.
Steve Andersen:

Schools are funded by the number of enrolled students…this family basically wants to steal from everyone else and use the Constitution as a cover

No, schools are funded by everyone paying taxes. The money may be distributed based on attendance, but the funding pool comes from everyone. The truth is exactly the opposite of your claim. Those with children in public schools are the ones stealing - from everyone who pays taxes, plus pays tuition to private school, from those who pay taxes, but don’t have kids in school, etc.
Steve Andersen:

Using their logic I should get a rebate on my taxes because I don’t have any children.

I think you are being sarcastic, but I agree with the sentiment. Why should you be forced to pay for schools that you are not using? I’ve got a house you can not use, want to help pay for that, too?
Steve Andersen:

Schools are a public utility set up for the common good like parks and libraries and roads

1. No where does the US Constitution give the Federal government any authority over any of these areas. We’d have to examine the State Constitutions one by one to decide on those.
2. If they are a public utility, then why do want to deny some the use of these facilities, just because they don’t want to use it all? Would you tell a kid they can’t play on the swing because their parents don’t use the picnic pavillion? Would you deny someone borrowing videos from the library because they don’t borrow books? Would you say someone can’t use a North/South Interstate because they don’t use an East/West one?

John 1863:

In my opinion if someone chooses to send a child to a private school…fine…just don’t expect everyone else to fund that choice.

But it’s OK for those of us who choose to send our children to private schools to fund those who don’t?

I think I now understand what is going on. Public school supporters oppose home schooling and private schooling because the funds are distributed based on attendance. If the funds were distributed based on the number of children residing in the district, regardless of where they go, the teachers, admins and other supporters would do a 180. Suddenly they’d be encouraging home schooling and private schooling, becauser they’d continue to get the same funding with fewer children.

 

[Giannawannabe]

john1863:

I constantly hear home-private schooling families bemoaning the fact that they pays taxes and receive no direct services. What about all the people who have no children? They pay taxes to support the education of other people’s offspring.
Perhaps all education should be privately funded…you want it…you pay.
Then listen to the moaning.

John

Around here, private schools have their own extracurricular/sports activities. The only ones opting in are homeschoolers. I guess I don’t get why private schoolers would wish to opt into public school programs, as they have their own.
Perhaps it’s different in other states?

 

[john1863]

Then I will clarify…if you opt out…thereby disrupting the per-child funding for a school district…you’ve opted out.
If the public schools are such cesspools of immorality, why would the band be any different? This sounds very much like Cafeteria Catholicism…I’ll accept only what I want and reject the rest.
BTW, it was stated ealier that homeschooled children score higher, etc., etc… That depends on which study you read.

John

 

[ChrisR246]

john1863:

Karin,
While you may not wish that to be so…the vouchers crowd wants exactly that. They want tax dollars to be diverted to private education.
John

Again we see terms like “tax dollars”. I think if we were to keep in mind where those “tax dollars” come from, we’d see that it is only fair that those earning and paying the money get to use some of it.

 

[ChrisR246]

john1863:

Then I will clarify…if you opt out…thereby disrupting the per-child funding for a school district…you’ve opted out.

We still have to pay.

If the public schools are such cesspools of immorality, why would the band be any different?

I’ll agree with that.

This sounds very much like Cafeteria Catholicism…I’ll accept only what I want and reject the rest.

Except that rejecting Catholic teaching means rejecting God’s Church. Surely you don’t make the same claim for the public schools?

 

[ChrisR246]

Speaking of cafeteria Catholicism, the catechism states

2229 As those first responsible for the education of their children, parents have the right to choose a school for them which corresponds to their own convictions. This right is fundamental. As far as possible parents have the duty of choosing schools that will best help them in their task as Christian educators. Public authorities have the duty of guaranteeing this parental right and of ensuring the concrete conditions for its exercise.

Sounds like vouchers could fall into that, particularly for those parents who can not afford to first pay for public schools then tuition at a Catholic school on top of it.

 

[Giannawannabe]

mlchance:

Good for them. Vouchers ought to be allowed in every state. There is no reason not to, and voucher programs have been proven an effective way of helping people get their children out of failing public schools.

– Mark L. Chance.

One of the main arguments against vouchers, is that the private/home schools will then be held to the same standards as the “government” schools. I believe these standards are one of the primary reasons that parents choose to homeschool/private school.

 

[john1863]

Chris,
Yes…you still have to pay…as do I…and I have no children.
I proposed in an earlier post that all education become a private matter…pay as you go. No Federal funding which, by the way, is miniscule for most school districts. No state funding, no local funding…straight out of the parent’s pockets.
This is a radical proposal and I’m not serious, but it would be the fairest method. You want the kids…you want them educated…you pay.

John

 

[Thekla]

Ann Cheryl:

There is much in what you say. But I have seen in more than one district poor spending. Most districts that I have been involved with have way to many administrators and secretaries. Buildings have been built only to have people wonder where the children are to fill them. I have seen manipulation of classrooms to make it appear that there is overcrowding in order to have a new school. One district tore down all unused buildings, and they were good buildings, leaving a school that had a falling in roof in order to build a new school.

You are a teacher? I lost a friend because I said I was sick of schools hiding sex education under the discuise of home ec. I didn’t know that was exactly what she was doing. I fought hard in my district for the schools to say exacltly what they were teaching. It took me twelve years but they no longer hide there program.
Being a teacher in public school is a tough job. If you are allowed to present your Christianity you are indeed fortunate. I have seen teachers removed because of this while the ones who brought in planned parenthood to there class are still there.

Will you please explain what you meant by

In my opinion, Lisa was carrying on about all the things missing in private/home schools. She gave the example of

“atheistic,planned parenthood and anti-Religious and relitavistic propaganda.”

I had given an example in my first post on this thread of teaching math to Catholic school students at my public school.

My area of the world would probably be considered liberal. But it’s interesting that we seem to have more talk of religion and faith in the public schools. I can’t recall what they call sex ed in the science class, but I know we have it and they send parents an outline ahead of time. It’s taught in science through the biolgy curriculum. Home Ec seems a bizarre place for it.

 

[ChrisR246]

john1863:

Chris,
Yes…you still have to pay…as do I…and I have no children.
I proposed in an earlier post that all education become a private matter…pay as you go. No Federal funding which, by the way, is miniscule for most school districts. No state funding, no local funding…straight out of the parent’s pockets.
This is a radical proposal and I’m not serious, but it would be the fairest method. You want the kids…you want them educated…you pay.

John

It is radical. You may not be serious when you say it, but I am, and I’ve been saying it for years. Not only is it the most fair method, it would be a hammer blow to government control over our lives and would result in an evetual dramatic boost in the entire culture, economy and overall quality of life in the US. We need radical changes.

 

[john1863]

Chris,
Actually I’m serious too. I’m a newby here and didn’t want to be too offensive. Don’t want people to think I’m a nut. :whacky:

John

 

[ChrisR246]

john1863:

Chris,
Actually I’m serious too. I’m a newby here and didn’t want to be too offensive. Don’t want people to think I’m a nut. :whacky:

John

Oh I’m sure many here are like most in the “real” world - advocate anything too radical, too logical, too simple and they will say you are a nut. Just endure and offer it up. That’s what I do.

 

[Rascal]

Even if funding is alloted on a per student basis, any math teacher will realize that with less students, the per student funding will be higher. I don’t think it unfair for a small percentage of that to help with extra-curricular activities for groups such as band or sports for home school children.

Everyone (as a society) is responsible for helping with public education in this country. I don’t think it’s unreasonable for people with no children to help support the school system. But to say that home schooled children should not have any access to any supporting services because they are not enrolled does not make sense. A home schooled family is taking the responsibility on their own (saving the district money that goes to other students), so they are not simply disappearing.

If you really want to make it equal the funding should truly be per student, so all home-schooled or private schooled or public schooled students get the same.

 

[Karin]

john1863:

Karin,
While you may not wish that to be so…the vouchers crowd wants exactly that. They want tax dollars to be diverted to private education.

John

No I dont think so. I think parents that are in favor of vouchers want the chance to send their kids to good schools so they can get a good education. It is time that the US public schools had to answer for the poor results they are producing in educating todays children. **(Please let me clarify-NOT ALL SCHOOLS SUCKS BUT A LARGE MAJORITY DUE!) **

 

[ChrisR246]

Rascal:

Everyone (as a society) is responsible for helping with public education in this country.

Why?

 

[Lurch104]

I think that for two random weeks per year (no notice to the public school), every private and parochial school should close their doors and send the children to public schools. Let them see how much money we are saving the school system when they are overloaded with our children. Maybe then they would be more reasonable when hijacking OUR income.

I have audited sever school districts in my area. $40k per year for a starting teacher with a range of between $60-$90k (using a SVRS) for experienced teachers is my experience. Additionally, $2k per year additional per student they mentor in one district. When asked what constitutes mentoring, no formal guidelines were given (or in place). All of this for working 9 months per year. I live in central PA, not NYC or LA, our cost of living is very modest. This is absolutely ridiculous.

 

[john1863]

Karin,
If a large majority of public schools suck, why does our nation continue to lead the world economically, scientifically, militarily and so on?
These bright people are coming from somewhere and it can’t be all home-private schools.
I live in a rural community with two solid school systems…one Catholic, one public. Both do a fine job and are financially responsible. However, only one is answerable to the tax payers…the public system.
If we want to move funds from the public to the private sector (home-private), will these organizations or individuals submit to public scrutiny? Will private schools open their board meetings to the public and allow them to be reported in the news?
With funding comes oversight…often ridiculous…like No Child Left Behind. Would the private groups want to submit to these regulations?
I think not.

John

 

[Giannawannabe]

Lurch104:

I have audited sever school districts in my area. $40k per year for a starting teacher with a range of between $60-$90k (using a SVRS) for experienced teachers is my experience. Additionally, $2k per year additional per student they mentor in one district. When asked what constitutes mentoring, no formal guidelines were given (or in place). All of this for working 9 months per year. I live in central PA, not NYC or LA, our cost of living is very modest. This is absolutely ridiculous.

Okay. What is it? Starting salary of 26K or 40K? Another poster from Pennsylvania was complaining that the starting salary of teachers in her area was 26K. I have never heard of starting teachers at 40K. My husband works in a very affluent area—the teachers start at about 27,500K.
Honestly, what SHOULD teachers be paid? What would the anti-public school teacher people think is fair? My husband works year round—he’s teaching summer school as we speak and does tutoring on the side to make ends meet. As another poster pointed out, if you’re a teacher who is married with a family, your spouse pretty much has to work. Teachers with years of experience and who have their PhDs make around 60K. To make up 90K would mean being an administrator of some sort.
The job description of 9 months per year is pretty general. That is how it is. The same people complaining that teachers only work 9 months a year, would also complain if their kid had to go to school all year.
So much complaining about teachers, when the real problem is the parents/families and to a certain extent the local government which pretty much dictates what needs to be taught to meet government standards.
Again, this is the problem with vouchers. If a private school/home school family uses vouchers, they will eventually be held to government standards as they will be using tax money.

 

[ChrisR246]

Giannawannabe:

.
Honestly, what SHOULD teachers be paid?

Likle everyone else, whatever the buyer is willing to pay, not what the government decides to take.

As another poster pointed out, if you’re a teacher who is married with a family, your spouse pretty much has to work.

So does most everyone else.

The same people complaining that teachers only work 9 months a year, would also complain if their kid had to go to school all year.

Not me. Send 'em year 'round with a 2 or 3 week break every quarter. Or better yet, let the schools individually decide how they want to teach, how much to pay and how much to charge and let the parents decide which they think is best and where to send their kids.

So much complaining about teachers, when the real problem is the parents/families

Of course not the teachers.

and to a certain extent the local government which pretty much dictates what needs to be taught to meet government standards.

And who is it that lobbies the government as to what should be standard? Not the teachers/admins?

Again, this is the problem with vouchers. If a private school/home school family uses vouchers, they will eventually be held to government standards as they will be using tax money.

Probably, so don’t give me a voucher, just stop taking my money in the first place.