smuga@hogpd.UUCP (J.SMUGA) (11/06/84)
I have heard people object to paying school taxes on the grounds that they have no children in public school. I do have children in public school, so I'm not very objective on this subject. I'd like to see some discussion of it here.
krista@iham1.UUCP (krista anderson) (11/09/84)
<>
We don't pay school taxes so our own kids can go to school. We pay
them so that all children can go to school. Thus, we maintain a well
educated country!
I don't have children just yet but school taxes are some taxes
I never resent paying.
ihnp4!iham1!kristageoff@desint.UUCP (Geoff Kuenning) (11/09/84)
In article <419@hogpd.UUCP> smuga@hogpd.UUCP (J.SMUGA) writes: >I have heard people object to paying school taxes on the grounds >that they have no children in public school. I do have children >in public school, so I'm not very objective on this subject. >I'd like to see some discussion of it here. Well, I don't have any kids (my worse luck), but here's my answer to those people: public education is not for the individual benefit of the children in the schools, or of their parents. Public education, like public health, is a method of ensuring that society can benefit from more productive people. When California passed Prop. 13, we dropped from one of the top school spenders to 49th. Businesses soon noticed that they couldn't get the benefits of good universities and public education, and started locating their plants elsewhere. -- Geoff Kuenning First Systems Corporation ...!ihnp4!trwrb!desint!geoff
brower@fortune.UUCP (Richard Brower) (11/10/84)
> > I have heard people object to paying school taxes on the grounds > that they have no children in public school. I do have children > in public school, so I'm not very objective on this subject. > I'd like to see some discussion of it here. I believe that schools (particularly puplic schools) are for the good of society, and as such are worthy of support by all members of such a society. I may be forced to change my opinion if public schools start teaching Christian prayer, myths as science, or other things not benefitial to society as a whole. Richard Brower Fortune Systems {ihnp4,ucbvax!amd,hpda,sri-unix,harpo}!fortune!brower
charliem@hammer.UUCP (Charlie Mills) (11/12/84)
In article <fortune.4611> brower@fortune.UUCP (Richard Brower) writes: >> >> I have heard people object to paying school taxes on the grounds >> that they have no children in public school. I do have children >> in public school, so I'm not very objective on this subject. >> I'd like to see some discussion of it here. > >I believe that schools (particularly puplic schools) are for the good of >society, and as such are worthy of support by all members of such a society. >I may be forced to change my opinion if public schools start teaching >Christian prayer, myths as science, or other things not benefitial to >society as a whole. > Right on! I'm not at all objective on this either. I can't imagine that anyone who reads this newsgroup is objective about school. Public education has nothing to do with charity. The idea is that if you want to have a democracy, you want everyone who votes to be equipped to do so intelligently. For example, it is in my own self-interest that the majority of Americans be well enough educated that they don't fall for demagogues or movie actors. The movement against property taxes is at its root just good old American anti-intellectualism. -- Charlie Mills uucp: ..{ucbvax,decvax,uw-beaver,hplabs,ihnp4,allegra}!tektronix!hammer!charliem
scw@cepu.UUCP (11/12/84)
In article <205@desint.UUCP> geoff@desint.UUCP (Geoff Kuenning) writes: >In article <419@hogpd.UUCP> smuga@hogpd.UUCP (J.SMUGA) writes: > >>I have heard people object to paying school taxes on the grounds >>that they have no children in public school. I do have children >>in public school, so I'm not very objective on this subject. >>I'd like to see some discussion of it here. > >Well, I don't have any kids [...] Prop. 13, we dropped from one of the top >school spenders to 49th. Businesses soon noticed that they couldn't get >the benefits of good universities and public education, and started >locating their plants elsewhere. I agree with you that public education is for the general benifit, but mainly it is to the benifit of the State <GENERALIZATION> (educated people make more money, and hence pay more taxes), and to me since it should (theoreticly) lower my tax rate. But Geoff, that Prop 13 statment's a CROCK. (1) it's only been 6 years since prop 13 passed, that's not enough time for any effect like that to be noticeable (time for kids to graduate from school, time for the system to break down, &tc &tc). (2) Then why is it that indrustrial parks are springing up all over the place (like mushrooms it seems)? (3) We didn't drop to 49th from [impiled 1st] we dropped to 30th from 15th (and there was lots of other funny things going on like 12 states GREATLY increasing their spending). (4) The UC system and the State University system are not funded by property taxes, they're funded by State income tax (from the general fund). -- Stephen C. Woods (VA Wadsworth Med Ctr./UCLA Dept. of Neurology) uucp: { {ihnp4, uiucdcs}!bradley, hao, trwrb}!cepu!scw ARPA: cepu!scw@ucla-cs location: N 34 3' 9.1" W 118 27' 4.3"
gnome@olivee.UUCP (Gary Traveis) (11/16/84)
Businesses picked up and moved because - 1) Over inflated housing made it impossible for their employees to live near work. 2) The traffic is getting worse geometrically. If an employer leaves an area because the education in public schools don't meet their requirement, then they will have a long move ahead of them. If you really want to see why LEARNING in public schools is so hard, drop down to any of the bay area police stations. They'll be glad to show you what goodies they've picked up in the halls.
toml@oliveb.UUCP (Dave Long) (11/16/84)
In article <cepu.412> scw@cepu.UUCP (Stephen C. Woods) writes: >But Geoff, that Prop 13 statment's a CROCK. (1) it's only been 6 years >since prop 13 passed, that's not enough time for any effect like that >to be noticeable (time for kids to graduate from school, time for the >system to break down, &tc &tc). (2) Then why is it that indrustrial >parks are springing up all over the place (like mushrooms it seems)? >(3) We didn't drop to 49th from [impiled 1st] we dropped to 30th from >15th (and there was lots of other funny things going on like 12 states >GREATLY increasing their spending). (4) The UC system and the State >University system are not funded by property taxes, they're funded by >State income tax (from the general fund). Hey! Your statement is a CROCK also. If you have been attending public schools for most of your life (3rd-10th grade for me), you would realize the effect that Prop. 13 is having. I have noticed it several times, (plus having it pointed out to me) and I have been attending relatively "rich" schools. While the college systems are important, high schools are also very impor- tant. Think about how many people never go to college, or only attend a vocational institute after graduating from high school. -- -- Dave Long -- {fortune,idi,ios,hplabs,tymix}!oliveb!toml {allegra,ihnp4,msoft,tty3b,uvacs}!oliveb!toml
jay@unm-la.UUCP (11/20/84)
> > I have heard people object to paying school taxes on the grounds > that they have no children in public school. I do have children > in public school, so I'm not very objective on this subject. > I'd like to see some discussion of it here. I have children in a private school. (Am I objective?) I'm sure glad that someone paid school taxes thirty years ago. I'd hate to cope with an environment where nearly all of the people I must work/associate with are uneducated. -- Jay Plett {{ucbvax,gatech}!unmvax, lanl}!unm-la!jay
bnapl@burdvax.UUCP (Tom Albrecht) (11/21/84)
In article <hammer.1003> charliem@hammer.UUCP (Charlie Mills) writes: >Public education has nothing to do with charity. The idea is that if you >want to have a democracy, you want everyone who votes to be equipped to do >so intelligently. For example, it is in my own self-interest that the >majority of Americans be well enough educated that they don't fall for >demagogues or movie actors. It sounds like you have a lot in common with the NEA. They don't like movie actors who run for public office either. > >The movement against property taxes is at its root just good old American >anti-intellectualism. > It could be that some people don't feel they are getting their money's worth. As long as we allow "professional educators" to run our school systems we won't get the quality of education we need to run a democracy. What we need is a complete overhaul of our public schools. Reward the excellent; throw out the incompetent. Bring back good, old-fashioned discipline to the classroom. Make teachers and administrators accountable to the parents, not vice versa. -- Tom Albrecht Burroughs Corp. ...{presby|psuvax|sdcrdcf}!burdvax!bnapl
toml@oliveb.UUCP (Dave Long) (11/27/84)
In article <burdvax.1821> bnapl@burdvax.UUCP (Tom Albrecht) writes: >It could be that some people don't feel they are getting their money's >worth. As long as we allow "professional educators" to run our school >systems we won't get the quality of education we need to run a democracy. >What we need is a complete overhaul of our public schools. Reward the >excellent; throw out the incompetent. Bring back good, old-fashioned >discipline to the classroom. Make teachers and administrators accountable >to the parents, not vice versa. No! Make teachers and administrators accountable to the STUDENTS, not to the parents or anyone else. The students should decide how to run the schools, because they are obviously the ones who can best decide what the quality of education needed to run a democracy is, since they'll be running it. Remember: "In a democracy, people get the government they deserve". What is wrong with "professional educators" anyway? Granted, I've had my share of differences of opinion with teachers and administrators, but it does not make them any different from the rest of the population. Could you, or somwone you know, do any better? Public schools are just that: Public, so they are set up to work best for the median of the student population. If we are talking about "fringies" here, I will give you that point, but then we do not need to overhaul the entire school system. We just need to set up some fringe schools. Also, what do you mean by "Bring back good, old-fashioned discipline to the classroom"? I will wait for a reply, either by mail or netnews, as to what you meant by that, before taking a chance on misinterpreting you. -- -- Dave Long -- {fortune,idi,ios,hplabs,tymix}!oliveb!toml {allegra,ihnp4,msoft,tty3b,uvacs}!oliveb!toml
canopus@amdahl.UUCP (Flaming Asteroid) (11/28/84)
> >[...] As long as we allow "professional educators" to run our school > >systems we won't get the quality of education we need [...] > >What we need is a complete overhaul of our public schools. Reward the > >excellent; throw out the incompetent. Bring back good, old-fashioned > >discipline to the classroom. Make teachers and administrators accountable > >to the parents, not vice versa. > No! Make teachers and administrators accountable to the STUDENTS, not > to the parents or anyone else. The students should decide how to run the > schools, because they are obviously the ones who can best decide what the > quality of education needed to run a democracy is, since they'll be running > it. Remember: "In a democracy, people get the government they deserve". > -- I must take issue with the idea of letting students decide how to run the schools. To me this is like letting the cat guard the canary. This philosophy has already been tried in the late 60's and through the early 70's at the college level, under the guise of ``relevent'' [to what?] education. Students shunned in general those courses that were either difficult (ie required much preparation) or uninteresting. The net result: a generation of college grads who lack certain skills and knowledge of their past. This has bubbled its way down to the elementary level to a certain extent, but enough to alarm people to begin a ``back-to-basics'' movement [``traditional education'']. Students at the elementary level have not accumulated enough information to even begin how to decide to run a school. I believe (and support through my local PTA) the notion of teachers accountability to the parents. Our local community school has a ``basics'' program in which my oldest daughter is enrolled. Essentially, the teacher commits to the parents to teach the child a certain set of skills, and the parents commit to seeing that the child completes homework assignments, etc. This is the third year for the program at our local school, and believe me it has made a phenomenal difference! That elementary school used to have a bad reputation; now parents from outside the school district are sending their kids there! Wow! This is really an interesting discussion! -- Frank Dibbell (408-746-6493) ...!{ihnp4,hplabs,amd,nsc}!amdahl!canopus [The views expressed herein are not necessarily the views of my employer, or myself, for that matter]
bezold@fluke.UUCP (David Bezold) (11/30/84)
Dave Long writes: > No! Make teachers and administrators accountable to the STUDENTS, not >to the parents or anyone else. The students should decide how to run the >schools, because they are obviously the ones who can best decide what the >quality of education needed to run a democracy is, since they'll be running >it. Remember: "In a democracy, people get the government they deserve". If we make teachers and administrators accountable to the STUDENTS, then school will probably consist of playing games. The system was meant to transfer the knowledge and experience of civilization to those who do not have that knowledge and experience. Having the students decide how they should be taught is a little like "the tail wagging the dog". If we assume that students should decide how they should be educated since they will be running the democracy someday, then why don't we have our children teach us how to read, since they'll be doing the read someday!
karl@osu-eddie.UUCP (Karl Kleinpaste) (11/30/84)
---------- >> No! Make teachers and administrators accountable to the STUDENTS, not >>to the parents or anyone else. The students should decide how to run the >>schools, because they are obviously the ones who can best decide what the >>quality of education needed to run a democracy is, since they'll be running >>it. > >I must take issue with the idea of letting students decide how to run >the schools. To me this is like letting the cat guard the canary. This >philosophy has already been tried in the late 60's and through the early >70's at the college level, under the guise of ``relevent'' [to what?] >education. Students shunned in general those courses that were either >difficult (ie required much preparation) or uninteresting. The net >result: a generation of college grads who lack certain skills and >knowledge of their past. ---------- I think a better question which should be raised is, "When should we let the kids decide what should be in their education, and how much should we let them decide?" We must concede that, eventually, the students will make their own decisions on what courses to take, when they reach college age. I went to a high school which has what is known as the Alternative Program [AP], which is a small subset of the total school population (about 150 out of about 2000) where the students have a great deal of control over what they are taught and in what manner, but they are still constrained by a number of guidelines imposed by a variety of sources, from the State Board of Education on down to the set of teachers who teach at it. The advantage which the AP gave me is that it allowed a fantastic amount of freedom of choice with respect to how much structure one got in one's education. The students could elect to do a lot of work on "contract," where a student would sit down with a teacher and discuss a particular project, usually for a 9-week period (a quarter of a school year). The student and teacher would come to an agreement which was written up in some detail; the two would state that, with the specified amount of work performed at a certain level of proficiency, the student would get thus-and-so a grade when complete. Doing remarkably better would result in better grades, and doing poorly results in lower grades. I did a lot of this sort of work, because I really like independent study (I'm working towards my MS by thesis in a project which [I hope] will be completely independent from other research in the Computer Science Dept here). There were also a large number of courses designed by students, and some of these were even run by students. For example, at the time when I was there, there was a surprisingly large number of people who were interested in flying in one way or another. There was one particular individual who was a very proficient model airplane builder/flyer (he participated in competi- tions regularly). This person got permission to teach a couple of courses in the physics of flying for a 9-week period. The only major condition for setting up a course of this type is that such courses must have an adviser, which is any of the teachers at the AP. This kept the students in check: if too many weird ideas were coming down from the students, no teacher would sponsor them. New course ideas would have to be created which a teacher would sponsor, and the students ended up with a very well-rounded education with these courses. One minor glitch with the system: due the difficulty of matching such individualized courses with subjects that the State Board understands, a course on research-paper-writing might be generalized in transcripts as just plain "composition." And, of course, students at the AP could always elect to take a couple courses from Main Campus which just weren't available at the AP. I took some intro computer programming courses at Main Campus while attending the AP. Probably the single best part (and the single most frustrating part as well) was the fact that the AP was run almost entirely by the students. Policy was decided in Town Meeting, a once- (or sometimes twice-) a-week occurrence. It was frustrating because there were attempts on several occasions to run the place by consensus vote, and you could never got 150 people to agree on anything all at once. What I'm really getting at, other than putting in an unabashed plug for my high school, is that students can in fact get a very good education on their own, as long as there are constraints placed on them by the adults around them. Students just don't have the maturity to do it entirely alone. Also, I would have to say that something like the AP would be unacceptable for anyone younger than high school as well, due to the possibility of truly impressive failures; there were a number of people at the AP who majored in sleeping, which resulted in them flunking out or being expelled. ---------- >This has bubbled its way down to the elementary level to a certain >extent, but enough to alarm people to begin a ``back-to-basics'' >movement [``traditional education'']. Students at the elementary >level have not accumulated enough information to even begin how to >decide to run a school. I believe (and support through my local PTA) >the notion of teachers accountability to the parents. ---------- Interestingly enough, so did our AP. As far as "back-to-basics" is concerned, we had our local Board of Education just drooling when we instituted a new course in basic English, required by all students, because it was realized that the level of proficiency was dropping noticeably, particularly at the AP. We did that entirely voluntarily, without any outside influence requesting it. That went over really well with the Board, for obvious reasons. As I've already said, I agree as well that elementary-age children are just not equipped to deal with this sort of a situation, and I don't recommend it at all for them. ---------- >Our local community school has a ``basics'' program in which my oldest >daughter is enrolled. Essentially, the teacher commits to the parents >to teach the child a certain set of skills, and the parents commit to >seeing that the child completes homework assignments, etc. ---------- Sounds a lot like our contracts. A good idea, I must say. ---------- >This is the third year for the program at our local school, and believe >me it has made a phenomenal difference! That elementary school used >to have a bad reputation; now parents from outside the school district >are sending their kids there! ---------- {:-)} Well, it's the 11th year for the AP! So there! {:-)} Just kidding. As a result of our AP's success, several surrounding school systems have also instituted similar programs. Good ideas tend to get copied a lot. -- From the badly beaten keyboards of best address---+ him who speaks in _*_T_y_P_e_* _f-_O-_n-_T-_s... | V Karl Kleinpaste @ Bell Labs, Columbus 614/860-5107 {cbosgd,ihnp4}!_c_b_r_m_a_!_k_k @ Ohio State University 614/422-0915 cbosgd!osu-eddie!karl
stanton@fortune.UUCP (W. Dean Stanton) (12/01/84)
> I have children in a private school. (Am I objective?) > I'm sure glad that someone paid school taxes thirty years ago. I'd > hate to cope with an environment where nearly all of the people I > must work/associate with are uneducated. > -- > Jay Plett > {{ucbvax,gatech}!unmvax, lanl}!unm-la!jay I agreed with this and went on, only to realize: TOO MANY (I don't dare say "nearly all") of the people I must work/associate with are uneducated. I'm sure your own examples are more interesting than mine: Today I went to my neighborhood Thrifty Drug Store (because it's close by). They are rarely well-stocked; I have to make a weekly stop to get what they didn't have last time. And the cashier -- when I found him -- gave me incorrect change. Again! That's two or three times in the last four! In this case, it might be the Elementary School which failed to educate him! - W. Dean Stanton, Graphics Software UUCP: {decvax!ihnp4,ucbvax!amd,hpda,sri-unix,harpo}!fortune!stanton USPS: Fortune Systems Corp, 101 Twin Dolphin Drive, Redwood City, CA 94065 Phone: (415) 594-2835 "A standard can always be improved. But it won't be; this is why it is a standard." - A. Lesea & R. Zaks
toml@oliveb.UUCP (Dave Long) (12/03/84)
In article <osu-eddi.127> karl@osu-eddie.UUCP (Karl Kleinpaste) writes about
an Alternative Program at his high school.
This is the sort of thing I had in mind when I wrote my article. I did
not mean to imply that the school would be entirely under control of the
students, and I should have specified that I was talking about high-school and
greater level students.
Sorry for any misconceptions....
--
-- Dave Long --
{fortune,idi,ios,hplabs,tymix}!oliveb!toml
{allegra,ihnp4,msoft,tty3b,uvacs}!oliveb!tomlact@pur-phy.UUCP (Alex C. Tselis) (12/04/84)
> > I have heard people object to paying school taxes on the grounds > > that they have no children in public school. I do have children > > in public school, so I'm not very objective on this subject. > > I'd like to see some discussion of it here. > > I have children in a private school. (Am I objective?) > I'm sure glad that someone paid school taxes thirty years ago. I'd > hate to cope with an environment where nearly all of the people I > must work/associate with are uneducated. I'm perfectly willing to pay school taxes (I guess that I do anyway). I have no kids in school, but I'm sure glad that other people's kids are. If there were no public schools, a lot of kids would be playing out on the streets (since many parents wouldn't be able to pay for private schools). And what does that mean? The kids would get bored with playing stickball, or building snowmen, or whatever kids do nowadays. And what would they do? THEY WOULD VANDALIZE AND STEAL ANYTHING THAT WASN'T NAILED DOWN!!!! :-) :-) I know I would have. (Actually, I did anyway, but that was always after school, when I was bored. If it were a full time occupation, I might have gotten caught!!!! :-#)############ ^ ^ | | moustache beard (These show my aged state, and prove that I cannot be prosecuted for my youthful pranks, which were pretty harmless anyway, since it's way past the statute of limitations!)