| WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ | |
 http://csua.com/feed/ | |
| ||||||
| 5/25 |
| 2008/2/6-11 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:49078 Activity:high |
2/5 How about this instead of the BS below:
I found out my school district spends $16K per child and it's
ranked in the bottom 1/3 in the State. Please explain why the
State deserves more of my dollars. A family of four is not getting
their $32K worth. In fact, many people in my city put their kids
in private school even though the government is spending $16K/kid.
That's a shitload of money for the government to waste. This is
how well the government manages your money and the education of
your kids. --dim
\_ Nice. You forgot to mention that we need to deport Mexicans
who are leeching off of tax dollars, that we need to be
tough on crimes, and that we need to build bigger jails.
\_ As opposed to... giving amnesty, being soft on crime,
and shutting down jails?
\_ Yay! Binary worldview!
\_ You know, countries that don't provide social services end up
having other problems like huge crime rate, mafia, gangster,
child gangster, prostitution (e.g. Brazil) and that affects
everyone from the middle class all the way to the upper class.
I guess this huge disparity is one of the main reasons why
nice LA/OC/SD homes are mostly gated communities with private
security guards.
\_ How about the State spend that $16K/pupil in a way that
makes sense instead? Many private schools educate for less
than $10K/pupil and even the best are at no more than
$24K/pupil. Please tell me why the education is substandard
at those rates. If the education was better maybe some of
the poor kids stuck in public schools would contribute more
to society and feel better about their prospects.
\_ You can't compare costs of private and public schools
directly, because of the selection bias of private schools.
(Kids of poor families with uninvolved parents don't go to
private school). -tom
\_ Ah. This is the hew and cry of the liberal. When one
\- did you go to private or public school?
it's "hue and cry". --your common law
consultant
\_ Seems to be both now, although
originally "hue and cry":
http://tinyurl.com/3bh7fm
http://tinyurl.com/32tod4
\_ If you're going by current usage,
that's a pretty liberal definition
of "seems to be both". Google has
548,000 hits for "hue and cry" vs.
888 for "hew and cry", a ratio of
about 600:1. For comparison,
"their" vs. "thier" gives 58:1.
\- no, "hue" is correct.
if hew is commonly used in
error, it is still an error,
\_ That's not really how our
language works.
\- i said "commonly used in
error" not commonly used.
common usage as slang or
as a short cut is one
thing ... there isnt
a requirement to use
say "whom" ... but in the
case of a word with a known
origin, there is a right
and wrong. somebody can
call herself "candee" but
if you spell the sweet
that way, it is wrong.
say "shall" vs will ...
but in the case of a word
with a known origin, there
is a right and wrong.
eventhough geeks like
virii, that is not correct
since its not from a latin
word for one.
either in latin nor english
today.
\_ And it's not even
commonly used in error,
according to the Google
stats above.
as with "toe/tow the line".
note that your second link is
not to the "official" nyt,
where "hue" is used.
of the schools in my district scored highly even with
mostly black and Hispanic students people like you
said the same thing. It's self-selecting, the principal
shipped out the bad kids, and so on. Nevermind the school
was a shithole for 20 years before that. Now parents want
their kids to attend there and the effect is snowballing.
You have to start somewhere and putting kids in an
environment conducive to learning is part of that.
You cannot allow a few disruptive kids to destroy the
entire system and the education of millions. The
teachers and administrators are very upset that that
school is doing well, which shows how sick the system is.
\- look i dont disagree with you that $16k/student is a
lot, but a couple of points:
1. the selection bias is a huge issue. my private
high school spend something like half what public
schools spent but they could choose who to take.
they didnt have govt mandates to meet special
education needs of of either handicapped students
or the pain in the ass factor of difficult
students.
2. surely you realize you can be matched one for one
with outrages in the private sector. the bart
supervisor making +$150k or the NYC school janitor
who is filed fishing on his boat during school hours
is trivial compared to corporate welfare, and the
or the golden parachutes for incompent but not
criminal executives in the private sector. private
industrury make be more efficient at many things
and one of them is extracting resources from the
govt.
\_ red herring: there is corporate graft so gvt
graft is ok. it isn't. gvt graft is far worse
because they extract my money by force and they
choose how much to extract. if a corporation
is run poorly they will go out of business. i
do not have to give them my money if they provide
a poor product or service or charge too much.
"surely you realize" this.
\- corporate graft [agaist shareholders] isnt
the same as corporate welfare or graft agaist
the govt. i'm not talking about high CEO
salaries, backdating options etc. more things
like no bid contracts, "socializing losses" etc
that is "theft from the taxpayers" just like
fraud in the oakland school district ...
except they are better at it and the amounts
are more. see savings and loan bail out,
agriculture subsidies etc.
\_ Uh huh, and this happens *only* because
the gvt has that money available because
it has taken it from tax payers. once the
gvt takes your money, it matters little if
they piss it away on public or private
theft. a corporation can not take
anything from me in a clean-gvt environment.
clean the gvt and the rest automatically
follows. you can not clean your sort of
gvt-aided corporation theft while the
gvt is dirty.
\- this "starve the beast" analysis is
ridiculous. you are choosing between
what is possible not what is platonic.
"the main reason american soldiers get
killed is because we sent them to war"
-> people in favor of war hate the troops
BTW, if the corporations can influence
what the standard is for breach of
fiduciary duty and can get directors and
officers insurance, then they certainly
can rip you off. you should read
barbarians at the gate for example.
do you know how conflicts of interest
work in practice during LBOs? you might
also want to read james surowiecki.
\_ I never said starve the beast. The
rest of your stuff has nothing to do
with what I said. I said a clean gvt
will not give my tax dollars to corps
for stupid/corrupt things.
\_ I don't think you will find too many
people arguing for a corrupt gov't. There
have been arguments about how to best
allocate resources for as long as their
have been gov'ts, which is to say since
the beginning of recorded history. What
kind of things do you advocate to help
clean up gov't, other than your somewhat
ambiguous notion that it should be
smaller? It seems to me that campaign
finance reform might be a better place
to start.
\_ I didn't say it should be smaller,
just that what they do have should be
spent more wisely and less wastefully.
If there was real oversight of budgets
we stopped all earmarks, and corps
were no longer 'citizens' with rights
and were not allowed to donate money
to politicians, that would go a long
way to clean gvt. What is your
solution?
again, read somebody like martin wolf.
i think there are a number of outragous cases
where "sepcial need" students have disporprotionate
resources spent on them, but just like heavy public
medical subsidies of "lost causes", it's a hard
problem.
\_ Like the birth-right citizenship person before you, it
sounds like your issue is with problems in how the education
system is run, not necessarily the system itself. Although
it may be more work, fixing the system is likely to prove
less expensive and more beneficial to society as a whole than
simply abandoning the system entirely and jumping to vouchers
spent at private schools or academies (many of which are
founded by people looking to make a quick buck by preying on
parents who are frightened of a public education, and many
of which are destined to go out of business in less than five
years).
\_ It's impossible to fix the system. It doesn't want to
be fixed. The solution we are proposing is to form our
own school district and secede. I guess you can call
that 'fixing'.
\_ It's not impossible to fix the system. It will, however,
take a lot of work, dedication, and determination. I
understand that this is not as sexy as, say, vouchers
for private schools and military academies, but the
end result is a stable, beneficial system.
\_ People have been trying to fix this problem for
20 years now. There's a point where you just say
'Screw it' and start from scratch.
\_ For most people, this point is when their kids
have graduated, which means we have to count on
a new crop.
\_ We should forcibly bus the kids from gated communities to
ghetto public schools. That way we ensure a level playing
\_ I see you are a budding Jonathan Swift, but FWIW we did this.
That's how the schools got screwed up to begin with. Then the
parents who really cared took their kids out and sent them
private, leaving behind only those too poor or unconcerned. It
had a devastating effect. Now our 'racially integrated'
schools have no caucasian or Asian students and the other
kids who want to learn are screwed. It's so much better now.
field. We should ban private schools. We should also ban
marriage, so that gays, bisexuals, and non-sexuals will
not be disadvantaged, and kids with single parents won't
be disadvantaged over kids with married parents. Actually we
should take kids away at birth and randomly assign parents
for them. We should make food and housing free for all,
and energy for heating and cooking and lighting and hot water,
and health care, because all those things are basic human rights
needed for survival. We should ban automobiles and ban wasteful
single family housing structures. All housing structures shall
be randomly assigned but with economic and ethnic backgrounds
balanced, and mandatory "community learning sessions" shall take
place 3 days per week. Community job centers shall provide
equal-opportunity employment, with jobs to be defined by
each employee.
\_ This is truly brilliant.
\_ at least school districts are more incompetent at stealing
your tax dollars than halliburton. i do think we should
stop glorifying school teachers ... i've some school teachers
who were smart but quite a few seem to be glorfied day care
personnel. but at least the rank and file teacher arent as
venal as school administrators. but again even they arent
ken lay, dennis kozlowski etc. you should read martin wolf.
\_ Oh, you're just selfish and hate children.
\_ Motd says you're contributing to the common social good and you
should be happy to be paying these taxes because there is no
other possible way to educate children other than turning them
over to the state for several hours a day. The schools can get
better only by raising your taxes even more. Teachers are
starving. Students are failing and not learning the right
things. It is all your fault.
\_ Incorrect: it's not op's fault, it's your fault.
\_ I'm in favor of 100% tax rates and therefore maximum
government revenue for maximum social good. how is it my
fault, comrade?
\_ Not your comrade, you filthy communist bastard, and
there's your problem in a nutshell: some regulation and
government organization != communism. Embrace compromise.
\_ This isn't about regulation. This is about control.
The power to tax is the power to destroy. And you,
comrade, obviously are in need of higher taxes. For
the common social good, of course. Embrace social
good.
\_ Marriage is slavery! All men are rapists! Dems
tax and spend! You're missing a lot of !!!
\_ Where did you find this out? Considering the general veracity
of the "facts" you state on the motd, I would need verification
before I would believe it, especially considering average per
pupil spending in CA is half that. -ausman
\_ Average spending per pupil does not account for things like
facilities. From CA DOE:
"This amount includes the cost of employee salaries and
benefits, books and supplies and replacement of school
equipment. The current expense of education does not include
non-instructional expenses such as construction and
acquisition of facilities, benefits for retired employees
and food services."
CA spends about $70B dollars each year to educate 6M K-12
students, or almost $12K per student per year - not the $7K
you often see quoted.
you often see quoted. Maybe more. Not sure if $70B considers
locally voted indebtedness or funding sources like PTA.
http://www.ebudget.ca.gov/StateAgencyBudgets/6010/agency.html
Our district has a lot of facilities for the number of kids
(since so many have been lost to private over the last 40 years)
and has been shuttering schools, which is ridiculous in itself
when you consider that almost everywhere else they are building
more schools and complaining about a shortage of space. --dim
\_ Your math is off quite a bit as there are really 6.4M K-12
students and some of the Dept of Education budget is for
adult education. The best I can figure the real numbers are
67.5B/6.4M kids = $10.5k/student, not the $12k you bandy
about. But you have a point that the Dept of Education takes
\_ You are splitting hairs here. $10.5K is still a lot of
money. You can go to a good private school for that money
and actually receive an education. The best public
school districts spend more than $10.5K I'm sure.
That's just what they get from the state and federal
governments as far as I can tell.
\_ Plenty of people go to public schools and get a perfectly
fine education. Things could always be better, but
there is lots of evidence that the schools in CA are
getting better. I will probably send my daughter to
improving. I will probably send my daughter to
\_ Plenty of people go to public schools and get a
perfectly fine education. Things could always be
better, but there is lots of evidence that the schools
in CA are improving. I will probably send my daughter to
public school (and I can afford private). The best
public schools rival the best private schools in
education quality, so I am not sure what point you
are trying to make, except perhaps that a great
education costs quite a bit of money.
\_ 1. The best public schools do not rival the best
private schools. There are some very good
public schools, but no one is ever going to
confuse those with an Exeter or Groton. Of
course, those schools cost quite a bit more, too.
I realize that.
\_ Compare Stuyvesant's Ivy League admission
rate to Exeter's.
\_ Can I send my kid there? I live in CA.
Also, talk about self-selecting.
Also, talk about self-selecting. BTW,
I think Exeter's rate is higher. Stuyvesant
sends more in terms of numbers because it
is larger. Why would one want to go to
a private university anyway? I am offended
that you would use that as a metric
instead of looking at the rate of
acceptance to glorious UC.
\_ Exeter is probably a bit higher, but
they are in the same league anyway.
I don't think I would want to send my
child to boarding school anyway, but
maybe I will feel differently once she
is a teenager. If you really want UC
admission send them to Lowell High
which is in SF.
2. No one has a problem with the top 10% of
public schools. It's that bottom 90% (and
especially bottom 30%) that's the real problem.
3. Personally (and this is just my preference) I
wouldn't send by kid to even the best public
wouldn't send my kid to even the best public
school. However, I still think a quality
"public" education is important, because not
everyone has that choice in the current system.
a large "tribute." You still haven't provided any evidence that
they spend $16k/student in your district.
a large "tribute." You still haven't provided any evidence
that they spend $16k/student in your district.
\_ Sorry, but I cannot find this online. Is it really
far-fetched when the average is $10.5K? Like I said,
we have a lot of schools and a shrinking number of
kids which makes the overhead higher than most places.
(I read it is 2x higher than the state average.)
\_ Why does everyone else's esstimate of per pupil spending
\_ Why does everyone else's estimate of per pupil spending
in CA differ so widely from yours. You are the one
making the outrageous claim here, back it up.
\_ What do you want me to do? I can't find it online.
Take it or leave it. I don't think $16K is
outrageous when the average is $11K.
\- ausman: the range in CA is really wide. that number is plausible
for a state school district, but it is hard to imagine it is
in such a poorly perfomring school district ... i.e. not
saratoga or CA. i can believe high spending per student with
poor performance in a place like SF (NYC spends something
like 14k per student ... but the top hedge fund guy made more
money last year than all the NYC teacher put together ... for
three years). but all that being given, i was wondering if the
number was correct as well.
\_ SF has generally good results and does not spend that much
per pupil. link:preview.tinyurl.com/2jxbxb (PDF)
\_ Hmm, I forgot SF public schools was very heavily
asian. I am guessing that keeps costs down. I was
just thinking about the white flight and minitory-heavy
side. Might be interesting to look at oakland hills vs
oakland flats.
\_ The experiment has already begun. Google "oakland
school district demographics"; the first hit is a 2007
report noting that OUSD is hemorrhaging students,
particularly African-American students; they're "out-
migrating" to non-bankrupt School Districts (cf.
articles on fraudulent enrollment in cities like
Hercules).
\_ Perhaps you should move to San Francisco:
http://www.reason.com/news/show/33293.html
\- special announcement: there is another long piece on ADRIAN
FENTY and MICHELLE RHEE's Washington DC school reform program
on TV tonight. it is about halfway through the MACNEIL-LEHERER
SHOW today. n.b. FENTY and RHEE are respectively the mayor and
school chief for DC. they are also both about 37! the evil
arlene ackerman was in DC before she came to SF. ok tnx. |
| 5/25 |
|
| tinyurl.com/3bh7fm -> www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-hue1.htm This idiom, meaning a loud clamour or public outcry, contains the obsolete word hue, which people these days know only as a slightly formal or technical word for a colour or shade. As a result, you sometimes see the phrase written as hew and cry. Our modern meaning goes back to part of English common law in the centuries after the Norman Conquest. There wasn't an organised police force and the job of fighting crime fell mostly on ordinary people. If somebody robbed you, or you saw a murder or other crime of violence, it was up to you to raise the alarm, the hue and cry. Everybody in the neighbourhood was then obliged to drop what they were doing and help pursue and capture the supposed criminal. If the criminal was caught with stolen goods on him, he was summarily convicted (he wasn't allowed to say anything in his defence, for example), while if he resisted arrest he could be killed. The same term was used for a proclamation relating to the capture of a criminal or the finding of stolen goods. The laws relating to hue and cry were repealed in Britain in 1827. This mysterious word hue is from the first part of the Anglo-Norman French legal phrase hu e cri. This came from the Old French hu for an outcry, in turn from huer, to shout. It seems that hue could mean any cry, or even the sound of a horn or trumpet -- the phrase hu e cri had a Latin equivalent, hutesium et clamor, "with horn and with voice". As an etymological footnote, the Old French huer survived in Cornwall right down to the early twentieth century. At that time an important part of local livelihoods in coastal communities came from the seasonal catch of fish called pilchards, which migrated past the coast in great shoals in early autumn. To be sure of not missing their arrival, fishermen posted lookouts on the cliffs. They were called huers, since they commonly alerted the waiting fishermen by shouting through speaking trumpets. |
| tinyurl.com/32tod4 -> dealbook.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/03/13/amid-hew-and-cry-british-buyout-firms-stay-on-message/ dealbook&posall=Middle1C,TopAd,Position1,Top5,SFMiddle,Box1,Bottom 3,Right5A,Right6A,Right7A,Right8A,Bottom7,Bottom8,Bottom9,Inv1,Inv2,In v3,tacoda,SOS,ADX_CLIENTSIDE&pos=Top5&query=qstring&keywords=? dealbook&posall=Middle1C,TopAd,Position1,Top5,SFMiddle,Box1,Botto m3,Right5A,Right6A,Right7A,Right8A,Bottom7,Bottom8,Bottom9,Inv1,Inv2,I nv3,tacoda,SOS,ADX_CLIENTSIDE&pos=Middle1C&query=qstring&keywords=? dealbook&posall=Middle1C,TopAd,Position1,Top5,SFMiddle,Box1,Botto m3,Right5A,Right6A,Right7A,Right8A,Bottom7,Bottom8,Bottom9,Inv1,Inv2,I nv3,tacoda,SOS,ADX_CLIENTSIDE&pos=Position1&query=qstring&keywords=? Private Equity * Industries + British private equity leaders, determined to change the perception of themselves as vultures and locusts, stayed on point Monday. Speaking at the annual dinner of the British Private Equity and Venture Capital Association, Rod Selkirk, the association's chairman, said private equity takeovers were responsible for strong growth in British jobs and exports over the past five years. He said the industry had also benefited workers' pension funds, because their investments in private equity funds had made double-digit gains. "This is an industry that does far more than just provide capital. The truth is that this is an industry that creates value and creates jobs. And so clearly not by asset stripping," said Mr Selkirk, who is also chief executive of Hermes Private Equity, which invests on behalf of the Royal Mail and BT pension schemes. His message comes amid an outcry in Britain by lawmakers and union leaders over private equity's increasing hold on British companies. According to The Guardian, about two-and-a-half million British workers are employed in companies controlled by private equity, and buyout firms are currently mulling takeover bids for the supermarket chain J Sainsbury's and the drugstore retailer Boots. Critics argue that the buyout shops are asset-strippers who use anti-union practices to drive down costs and are encouraged by British tax breaks to load the companies with debt, making them more vulnerable to collapse. Britain's Parliament is preparing to conduct an inquiry into the private equity industry. Paul Kenny, general secretary of the GMB union, told The Guardian the research used by the private equity association was disputed by many experts. which covers up asset-stripping on a grand scale," he said. Michael Meacher, a contender for control of the Labour party, told the newspaper that these buyout shops are targeting "healthy, well-managed companies with a large cash flow, often extracting huge personal gains at the expense of enormous job losses and crippling a firm with large debt." dealbook&posall=Top5,Box3,SFMiddle,Right,Bottom3,Right5A,Right6A, Right7A,Right8A,Middle1B,Bottom7,Bottom8,Bottom9,Inv1,Inv2,Inv3&pos=Bo x3&query=qstring&keywords=? A Financial News Service of The New York Times&posall=TopAd,Position1,Top5,SFMiddle,Box1,Bottom3,Right5A,Right6 A,Right7A,Right8A,Middle1C,Bottom7,Bottom8,Bottom9,Inv1,Inv2,Inv3,taco da,SOS,ADX_CLIENTSIDE&pos=Bottom7&query=qstring&keywords=? A Financial News Service of The New York Times&posall=TopAd,Position1,Top5,SFMiddle,Box1,Bottom3,Right5A,Right6 A,Right7A,Right8A,Middle1C,Bottom7,Bottom8,Bottom9,Inv1,Inv2,Inv3,taco da,SOS,ADX_CLIENTSIDE&pos=Bottom8&query=qstring&keywords=? A Financial News Service of The New York Times&posall=TopAd,Position1,Top5,SFMiddle,Box1,Bottom3,Right5A,Right6 A,Right7A,Right8A,Middle1C,Bottom7,Bottom8,Bottom9,Inv1,Inv2,Inv3,taco da,SOS,ADX_CLIENTSIDE&pos=Bottom9&query=qstring&keywords=? A Financial News Service of The New York Times&posall=TopAd,Position1,Top5,SFMiddle,Box1,Bottom3,Right5A,Right6 A,Right7A,Right8A,Middle1C,Bottom7,Bottom8,Bottom9,Inv1,Inv2,Inv3,taco da,SOS,ADX_CLIENTSIDE&pos=Inv1&query=qstring&keywords=? A Financial News Service of The New York Times&posall=TopAd,Position1,Top5,SFMiddle,Box1,Bottom3,Right5A,Right6 A,Right7A,Right8A,Middle1C,Bottom7,Bottom8,Bottom9,Inv1,Inv2,Inv3,taco da,SOS,ADX_CLIENTSIDE&pos=Inv2&query=qstring&keywords=? A Financial News Service of The New York Times&posall=TopAd,Position1,Top5,SFMiddle,Box1,Bottom3,Right5A,Right6 A,Right7A,Right8A,Middle1C,Bottom7,Bottom8,Bottom9,Inv1,Inv2,Inv3,taco da,SOS,ADX_CLIENTSIDE&pos=Inv3&query=qstring&keywords=? A Financial News Service of The New York Times&posall=TopAd,Position1,Top5,SFMiddle,Box1,Bottom3,Right5A,Right6 A,Right7A,Right8A,Middle1C,Bottom7,Bottom8,Bottom9,Inv1,Inv2,Inv3,taco da,SOS,ADX_CLIENTSIDE&pos=tacoda&query=qstring&keywords=? A Financial News Service of The New York Times&posall=TopAd,Position1,Top5,SFMiddle,Box1,Bottom3,Right5A,Right6 A,Right7A,Right8A,Middle1C,Bottom7,Bottom8,Bottom9,Inv1,Inv2,Inv3,taco da,SOS,ADX_CLIENTSIDE&pos=SOS&query=qstring&keywords=? |
| www.ebudget.ca.gov/StateAgencyBudgets/6010/agency.html Additional Information K thru 12 Education K-12 education programs provide academic services to pupils between the ages of 3 and 19. Included in these services are standards-based academic instruction, special education services, vocational and career preparatory programs, child care and development services, teacher recruitment and development, adult education programs, and remedial instruction services. These programs work together to provide Californians with the skills necessary for successful adulthood, achieving career goals, obtaining gainful employment, and pursuing higher education opportunities. AGENCY'S PORTION OF THE BUDGET (State Funds) The following chart represents the Agency's portion of the 2008-09 Budget. These totals do not include federal funds, certain non-governmental cost funds, or reimbursements. Back to Top The following table reflects positions and expenditures for each department in this agency area. State funds reflect total General Fund, special funds, and selected bond funds. Total funds include state funds, federal funds, other non-governmental cost funds, and reimbursements. This document provides a printable format (pdf) of all budget information for this state agency including, where applicable, the Fund Condition Statements and the Detail of Appropriations and Adjustments. |
| www.reason.com/news/show/33293.html Print Edition Imagine a city with authentic public school choice--a place where the location of your home doesn't determine your child's school. The first place that comes to mind probably is not San Francisco. But that city boasts one of the most robust school choice systems in the nation. Caroline Grannan, a public school advocate and super-involved parent, lobbied hard to wear down the San Francisco school district back in 1996 and get her son William, then an incoming kindergartner, out of his assigned neighborhood school, Miraloma Elementary, and into a "more desirable" alternative school called Lakeshore. In 1996 Miraloma had low test scores and a low-income student body bused in from other neighborhoods; Lakeshore had a better reputation and higher student performance. Once, Grannan remembers, it was conventional wisdom in San Francisco that there were only five decent public schools in the city; if you couldn't get your child into one of them, it was time to move to the suburbs or to find a private academy. Today Grannan could send her child to any school within the city. What's more, she would happily send her kids to Miraloma, one of many elementary schools in San Francisco that now attract eager middle-class clients. Miraloma has a new principal with a parent-friendly attitude, has begun to raise its test scores, and is more diversified. Families now feel secure taking advantage of Miraloma's longstanding positive attributes, including its small size and its sheltered and attractive setting. Grannan's more recent experience with her children's middle school also reflects how San Francisco schools have changed. Her son William just graduated from Aptos Middle School, and her daughter Anna started sixth grade there this year. This school is now in high demand, but in 1996 parents considered it dirty, dangerous, and academically weak. Today it offers enriched language, arts, and music programs, and its test scores continue to improve. She is a founding member of the San Francisco chapter of Parents for Public Schools, a PTA board member, and a prolific writer whose articles about local schools appear in the San Francisco Examiner and other publications. She has argued passionately against both vouchers and charter schools, and would wince to be portrayed as a partisan of school choice. Yet she has become an avid supporter of the San Francisco system and the benefits it brings to San Francisco families. San Francisco is one of a handful of public school districts across the nation that mimic an education market. In these districts, the money follows the children, parents have the right to choose their children's public schools and leave underperforming schools, and school principals and communities have the right to spend their school budgets in ways that make their schools more desirable to parents. As a result, the number of schools parents view as "acceptable" has increased greatly in the last several years. In Grannan's words, "Parents who are willing to go beyond the highest-status schools can now easily find many more acceptable options, and can avoid the fight for a few coveted seats in the most prestigious schools." Decentralization Rules Give credit to Arlene Ackerman, San Francisco's superintendent of schools since 2000. Ackerman introduced the weighted student formula, pioneered in Edmonton, Alberta, in 1976, which allows money to follow students to the schools they choose while guaranteeing that schools with harder-to-educate kids (low-income students, language learners, low achievers) get more funds. Ackerman also introduced site-based budgeting, so that school communities, not the central office, determine how to spend their money. Finally, she worked to create a true open-enrollment student assignment system that gives parents the right to choose their children's schools. In San Francisco the weighted student formula gives each school a foundation allocation that covers the cost of a principal's salary and a clerk's salary. The rest of each school's budget is allocated on a per student basis. There is a base amount for the "average student," with additional money assigned based on individual student characteristics: grade level, English language skills, socioeconomic status, and special education needs. These weights are assigned as a percentage of the base funding. For example, a kindergartner would receive funding 133 times the base allocation, while a low-income kindergartner would receive an additional 009 percent of the base allocation. Therefore, the kindergartner would be worth $3,406, and the low-income kindergartner would generate an additional $230 for his school. The more students a school attracts, the bigger the school's budget. So public schools in San Francisco now have an incentive to differentiate themselves from one another. Every parent can look through an online catalog of niche schools that include Chinese, Spanish, and Tagalog language immersion schools, college preparatory schools, performing arts schools that collaborate with an urban ballet and symphony, schools specializing in math and technology, traditional neighborhood schools, and a year-round school based on multiple-intelligence theory. The number of students, the school hours, the teaching style, and the program choices vary from site to site. The pressure to attract children has produced not just a greater variety of unique schools but new school capacity based on the specific demands of parents. For example, as demand has exceeded the number of available seats the district has added more Chinese and Spanish dual-language immersion programs. The weighted formula ensures that schools have an incentive to recruit and serve students with learning disabilities, limited English proficiency, and other difficulties. All this diversity is useless if parents don't know about it, so schools have an incentive to market their programs as well. Much of the marketing is done through a local chapter of Parents for Public Schools. The district and the chapters host school enrollment fairs, and the schools offer parent tours throughout the school year. Parents can select up to seven schools on their enrollment application. In the 2005-06 school year 84 percent of parents received one of the schools they listed, with 63 percent receiving their first-choice school. More than 40 percent of the city's children now attend schools outside their neighborhoods. Decentralized school management is a growing trend in the United States. To date the weighted student formula has been implemented in Cincinnati, Houston, St. This year a weaker version that does not include school choice is being implemented statewide in Hawaii, and pilot programs are underway in Boston, Chicago, and New York City. By contrast, most districts in the United States use a staffing ratio model, in which the central office directs school sites to spend their resources in a particular way, through allocations of staff and a small supplies budget. For example, a school might be sent one teacher for every 28 students. This system gives individual institutions little control over their financial resources and personnel choices. Oakland, which completed its first year of the weighted student formula in 2004-05, is taking the decentralized concept further than any district in the United States. Edmonton, San Francisco, and the others all charge each school not for the actual salary of each teacher but for "average teacher salaries" in the district. This means that, for the sake of school budgets, differences in teacher salaries are ignored; on paper, a first-year teacher costs the same as a 30-year veteran. This practice hides funding inequities within districts where more desirable schools are stacked with senior teachers and other institutions are staffed with less experienced instructors. In practice, schools with lower-paid teachers end up subsidizing schools with higher-paid teachers. In Oakland, by contrast, schools are charged the actual cost of their employees, so a school with more novice educators has more money left over to pay for training or supplies or even to hire another te... |