Please don’t say this is school “reform.”
The state superintendent of education in Illinois wants to remove class size limits for special education.
Time to ask why the richest nation on earth can’t afford to provide a free and appropriate education for children with the greatest needs.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
I just wish once, just one time, that anyone who says that class size does not matter would spend a day in a classroom with our neediest students, either those who are special ed or our youngest students. You just can’t line them up at your desk and tell them to take a number. They won’t be put on hold while you work with one student. Due to budget cuts, we don’t have the paraprofessional assistance we once had. It’s just us and them. We keep talking about the need to differentiate. How is this possible in a large group? When I teach larger classes I feel like I’m a ringleader in a three-ring circus: I’m constantly on the go, but I feel like no one is getting the attention they deserve. I’ve taught classes from 11 to 23 and I can tell you, class size does matter!
I think part of the “class sizes don’t matter” discourse involves a grim recognition that budget realities mean that class sizes cannot be lowered, so let’s not dwell on it. And we now live in the age of data, so certain groups are going to want to see the correlations between class size and . . . . whatever you want to call the output that was formerly known as “learning.” Unfortunately, it’s difficult to quantify the output, and it’s difficult to show the correlations, especially when you’re talking about small and incremental changes in class size. But we all know intuitively that, ceteris paribus, it’s better to have a smaller class than a larger one.
Maybe, but I have 235 students over 7 class periods, for grades 8 and 9 in social studies. There’s got to be SOMETHING we can do.
I have 235 students in one class. No one thinks it is best, but it is cheap. We can lower class size at the cost of giving something else up. In our state budget it might be earned income tax credits that benifit the less well off, it might be the mortgage tax deduction that benefit the relatively wealthy. What would you choose?
There are a lot of other options. Income tax is probably the most obvious. Assuming your state has income tax.
My state is heading the other way on income taxes.
And given the trend at the federal level, raising state, municipal, and property taxes is going to be an increasingly hard sell. And a lot harder in NYC than Houston, probably.
That’s a college lecture hall. Do you have TAs?
Indeed I do have TAs for that class, though not for the others I teach. My point concern the trade off between class size and education cost.
Relatedly, does the TA model make sense as a way to attack rising class sizes in K-12?
When I was in public schools, there were no paraprofessionals in the classroom. My children talk about them routinely. I have always thought of them as the equivalent of a TA, but perhaps I am incorrect.
I feel like they’re more common in the elementary grades. Presumably K-12 teachers here would know.
TE, when you went to school, were there students with disabilities in your classes? We’re there classes for autistic children? For kids on ventilators? Just wondering.
Not that I noted. I am not sure why that is relevant, however. My mentioning of paraprofessionals was asking if they are roughly equivalent to teaching assistants.
Education has changed from the days when the teacher taught a lesson with everyone literally on the same page, the struggling kids as well as those who needed more challenge. Back in the day we sat at our desks all day, every day. Every class had that one “bad kid”, the one we knew to avoid. If I had only one kid with behavioral issues in my classroom I would probably do cartwheels every day out of the school to my car.
The emphasis on differentiation, RTI (Response to Intervention, where children formerly serviced in the resource room are serviced by the classroom teacher) as well as inclusion means that often a teacher is spinning more plates in the air than is humanly possible. I don’t have a para all day, but it is wonderful when she is in my room. Paraprofessionals help a group of students practice a skill, bring a sick child to the nurse, maintain control during group/independent work times while the teacher is working with another child or small group, help a child get caught up when absent (this winter I have only had a handful of days with 100% attendance), help children correct work, and so much more. Give me the students and the teaching methods of the 1960’s and I’ll be glad to give up my para.
“Budget realities”? You mean the same sad realities that prevent us from spending billions on tests and charter schools? Oh, wait….
I’m not aware how much Illinois spends on tests. But these same budget realities are a big part of the motivation to replace regular district schools with charter schools with lower wage and benefit costs. This is not complicated.
Teaching economist says that when he went to school, there were no paras in his classrooms. I don’t know how old TE is or what years he attended public school but the history of special ed isn’t particularly long — it’s been just over 30 years since the civil right of children w/disabilities to an education was finally recognized.
I also don’t know when it was that the art and science of special ed evolved enough to include mainstreaming and inclusion but it is possible that TE’s grade school education ocurred before there were very many special needs kids in general ed classrooms, which is where the paraprofessionals come in, to provide the supports these children need to succeed in their “least restrictive environment.” His children go to school now, so of course there are paras in their classrooms — just as there are now computers in my child’s classrooms and none in my day. History marches on.
Also, comparing a COLLEGE LECTURE class with public school special education is ridiculous. Now I’m going to stop commenting before I lose even more patience.
Barbara,
Again I was just using that figure to illustrate the trade off between class size and education expense. We can lower class size, but we must give up something else. There is always an opportunity cost.
And alas, I graduated from college over 30 years ago. My kids have paras in the classroom without IEP kids.
Thanks. I often feel like I should change my tagline to “Crazy Elementary Teacher”. I try to give an “in the trenches perspective” to our conversations, not being much of a policy wonk.
@TE: You would not necessarily know if your children had a classmate with an IEP or not: they don’t wear labels on their foreheads! (Sorry for the cheekiness: it’s been a long day.) Children with IEPs could have attentional issues, behavioral issues, or learning disabilities and still blend into the classroom. Ok, maybe not those with behavioral issues…
I well know that IEP students do not have those labels as I have sent two students with IEPs through public schools.
After further inquiry with the remaining K-12 student, he says paraprofessionals were more common in junior high where the classes were larger ant the students in the class more heterogeneous. His high school classes often have teaching assistants, which seem to be something different from paraprofessionals.
PL 94142.
Class size has to match state funding formula. 1.5 funding for a special ed student, means that a reasonable class size of 30 students is equal to a reasonable class size of 20 special ed students.
Maybe the states are grossly underfunding special ed.
Crazy.
“Time to ask why the richest nation on earth can’t afford to provide a free and appropriate education for children with the greatest needs.”
I would prefer if it were time to stop answering questions about specific state budgets with the same general question about “why the richest nation on earth can’t afford” stuff. Especially when we don’t like the feds involved in education, and when we’ve learned that the federal government tends not to hand out money without accompanying oversight that many here characterize as coercive.
Arguably, the US doesn’t spend enough on education. But that argument is probably weaker at this moment than at almost any previous moment over the last 40 years, during which education spending in the US has risen sharply despite relatively flat school enrollment.
That was a little harsh in tone, so I apologize for that. It just gets tiring when the first reaction to the latest bad education news is an imprecation against a rich and miserly Uncle Sam. Illinois is dealing with very real financial problems, and all the glib cynicism in the world doesn’t help me think about the policy issues.
“Illinois has the most inequitable education funding system in the country, with per pupil spending ranging from a high of almost $23,700 to a low of less than $4,500.” http://www.ctbaonline.org/All%20Links%20to%20Press%20and%20Reports/Education/Current%20status%20of%20education%20funding.pdf
Illinois funds school districts primarily through property taxes. Claims that education funding has increased does not apply across the board in IL, as affluent areas virtually always have more funds for per-pupil expenditures. This is one of the reasons why federal funds are needed here.
Millionaires/Billionaires tax has to happen.
From your mouth to God’s ears..
Illinois has the highest level of local funding of all the states. Many who post here talk about the virtue of local control. There is an old saying about those that pay the piper get to call the tune. More equal funding will result in more state control. Which would you prefer?
I would prefer equitable funding. Chicago has been under mayoral control for 18 years and has no elected school board, so the community has virtually no say anyways.
Here’s a great article from yesterday’s Salon regarding the democratic process in education and the “reform” message, “Michelle Rhee: Wrong again” “Her education “reform” movement sends the lovely message that communities should stay out of their schools”
http://www.salon.com/2013/02/26/teaching_kids_to_hate_democracy/
Great article in Salon. Do not forget she was a total failure with about $29,000/student. N.Y. is a problem with mayoral control Blumburg and about $21,000/student. Why do we promote losers and totally corrupted people into higher offices the worse they are? If you want to watch Rhee speaking in L.A. go to George1la on You Tube. You can also see Gloria Romero the head of the DFER in California at her press conference and watch them choke when asked real questions. I like to put up on edited video so that no one can say “You took that out of context.” It seems that if you are financed by the billionaires who are supported by the president you can say and do whatever you want. Just look at what has been on this blog about the heavy money coming to LAUSD for the billionaires boys club to continue to own LAUSD and spread the gravy around to their friends.
Well, I’m no expert on this, but as a teacher I’ve always wondered if say I have a class of 30 students and DOE spends $18.000 per student (18k x 30 = $540.000) where the money is going exactly given what my salary is with fringe (540-80 = 460). Now I understand that special needs students take up some of this remaining. $460,000 and I don’t teach a full 7 period day so they need another fractional teacher to make it work, but still this seems to leave a lot of money left over.
Ok, so where does it go? Let’s look at the total breakdown for 2009-10:
https://www.nycenet.edu/offices/d_chanc_oper/budget/exp01/y2009_2010/function.asp
Notice that in class instructional funds take up only 43% which includes teachers salaries and fringe, texts, libraries, supplies and equipment, other contracted instructional services and PD. Interesting that PD alone here takes up half billion dollars and is 2.5% of the total DOE budget and is about 6% of all in class instructional funds which seems bit high to me. I mean, who is actually getting paid half billion dollars to PD teachers? Interesting.
So where is the remaining 57% spent? Well, 8.3% of total budget is spend on on site principals and APs and what they need.(not counting central office, etc); or looked at another way, about 20% of total in class instructional funds on supervision, which certainly seems high to me. Do we really need supervisor costs equal to one in every 5 teachers? Obviously Bloomberg does.
But where is the remaining 48% going? Well, now we come to 31 other individualized line items. Instructional Support Services is 12% (half of that is related services), 8% is food, transportation and safety, and 7.5% is building services. So ok, this is another 27% but that leaves about 20% left to account for or about 4 billion dollars.
Now we come to the weird parts. 20% of the total budget (or about half of class room instructional costs remember) is taken by Field Support Costs, System Wide Costs, System Wide Obligations, and Pass-Throughs. Sub items include retiree health and welfare (2.1%), Debt Service (3.5%), and 8% on special education pass-throughs. I don’t get debt service since I wasn’t aware that the DOE had that kind of debt (seems they owe about 5 billion dollars or so). Also, 8% of pass-throughs going to special education. Pass through to whom exactly?
Anyway, we still have about 6% of the budget to go to explain. 4% seems to be going to various forms of central administration costs of some sort (Field Support Costs, Central Administration). Since this is about 10% of classroom instructional costs and on top of on site supervision, this seems high since it’s almost a billion dollars. The last 2% goes to Charter Schools at that time.
So now you know. Go figure.
A.S. Neill — maybe you’ve thought about this. Bear in mind that this is obviously overly simplistic, but the numbers don’t make sense to me.
When I look at the NYC DOE’s payroll data for 2011, I see 62,879 full-time teachers that are not classified as “special education.” I also see about 20,000 “special education” teachers. So, I make the assumption that there were 62,879 “general education” teachers in NYC in 2011.
How many “general education” students are there in NYC? I’ve read that there are 160,000 students in NYC that receive some kind of special ed services. I assume a lot of them are in gen-ed classrooms. But to be quick and dirty, I’ll pull them out of this calculation and just assume that there are about 940,000 gen-ed students in NYC (1.1 million minus 160,000).
940,000 divided by 62,879 = a student-teacher ratio of 15. Obviously this is not REMOTELY close to the average class size in NYC. I assume it’s not even close to the student-teacher ratios calculated by the DOE.
So my question is, what gives?
When they caculate the student/teacher ratio they include the people with teaching credentials not in the classroom and I guarantee you that is a large number at LAUSD. It is all a joke and to not be considered in reality. The number that matters is what is the real class size not how many credentialed teachers there are especially in a larger district where they are easy to hide. In the budget you will see credentialed and classified employees.
Actually the 15 is very close to the numbers reported by the NCES. The student teacher ratios for 2000 are between 15.3 and 15.8 nationally.
The NYC Department of Education reports “class sizes” in the mid-20s, more or less, for all grades. What I don’t get is how the DOE has 63,000 general education teachers, which, if space weren’t a concern (and it definitely is a concern in NYC), should in theory be able to yield a “class size” of 15. George says they’re likely counting teachers who aren’t in the classroom. Where are they, then? NYC doesn’t have 20,000 ATRs.
Call the NY DOE or Bloomberg’s office tomorrow. I’m sure they will get back to you to explain it all. They are known for expediency and transparency when it comes to education and the truth.
“during which education spending in the US has risen sharply despite relatively flat school enrollment.”
Hi,
Can you supply a source for this?
I am not trying to start a fight, but I am interested and have never heard this stat before (at least not that I recall.)
I wonder if this takes into account the number of various types of students enrolled?
I do recall reading somewhere that enrollment for ESOL and special needs students has increased in recent decades, but I have no source for this right off hand.
Thank you.
Here’s two sources, to be read together. First, per-pupil spending on public education from 1961-62 through 2008-09:
http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=66
So, in 1970-71, per-pupil spending was at $4,596. In 2008-2009, it was $10,694. These are inflation adjusted for 2009 dollars.
Second, enrollment numbers, for both public and private school, from 1969 to 2009 (and projections for future years). Over those 40 years, enrollment in public schools has increased only around 10%.
http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=65
Here’s two sources, to be read together. First, per-pupil spending on public education from 1961-62 through 2008-09:
http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=66
So, in 1970-71, per-pupil spending was at $4,596. In 2008-2009, it was $10,694. These are inflation adjusted for 2009 dollars.
Second, enrollment numbers, for both public and private school, from 1969 to 2009 (and projections for future years). Over those 40 years, enrollment in public schools has increased only around 10%.
http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=65
Fiercer: how much of the increase in spending was driven by the cost of special education?
I don’t know that offhand, but I would expect that a very, very large portion was driven by special education. I’m sure a rough measure that illustrates that factor is available.
Benefits have also consistently outpaced inflation and are perhaps the fastest growing cost today. And employee pension costs have also skyrocketed, particularly over the last decade. Although I don’t know if pension costs are included in the numbers I cited above (and I suspect they’re not).
This is a constant argument with LAUSD in which they claim they are so poorly funded in the state and nationally. Thanks for the information nationally. I have not looked at it in awhile. In 2008-09 LAUSD had in revenue/student according to the Calif. Dept. of Ed. (CDE) and the national average was $10,591/student. This means that LAUSD had $741/student more than the national average. LAUSD in that year had $2,080 more than the California State average for Unified School Districts. I confronted a UTLA representative on the Curriculum Committee just yesterday on this issue and amazingly enough that person denied they were representing UTLA when UTLA is on her placard in front of her and on the agenda material. This is how stupid UTLA is on the revenue/student of LAUSD. I was at and testified at an Assembly Select Committee Meeting at which Superintendent Deasy and Board President Garcia told the Committee members that LAUSD only has $4,800/student when it was really $11,233. They either lied or are totally ignorant. In either case they should immediately lose their job as how can you control a district if you do not know your revenue or are arrogant and brazen enough to think you can just lie to the Committee. What they did not know is that the Committee had a 10 year spreadsheet on this information from CORE-CA and we later testified to this and presented 10 year spreadsheets on 20 school districts in California.
At LAUSD special ed catagorical funding, according to the 2012-13 superintendents budget was 24% of all revenue to LAUSD. According to the 2012-13 budget special ed ADA is 4.7% of the total ADA. I called the Chanda Smith court appointed monitor and he told me it was 11.47%. I asked him where he obtained his information and he told me from the LAUSD data. I then asked him how in the same data base it could be 4.7% and 11.47% and he did not know. Then I asked him if he knew that the funding for special ed was 24% of the LAUSD total and he did not know. Is this what we want? How can this be? Total fraud is what it is. Have any of you out there analyzed your districts budget and found anything similar?
Flerper,
I guess all teachers should live in a commune where we grow our own food, raise other people’s children and with no need for health care or a pension, then everything will be affordable for communities throughout our country. If we could just find a way to pay teachers less, with no due process rights, schools and society would improve dramatically.
I think Flerper was simply pointing out that we spend more per student today then in the past. My guess is that it is because 1) we are attempting to provide and education to students that are more difficult to educate now then we did in the past and 2) we no longer segregate women into very few professions, reducing the salaries of teachers.
I did not see anything about reducing teacher pay in anything that he said.
The number of pupils per teacher has also fallen fairly dramatically from 27.5 – 26 pupils per teacher in the 1950’s to around 15.5 pupils per teacher in the 2000’s.
Source: http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d11/tables/dt11_085.asp?referrer=report
When you are looking at revenue/student it does not matter what the enrollment is until you get to the really small school districts where they need disproportionate revenue to make up for the small amount of students in the rural districts. This is proper. We have a school district in L.A. County with under 60 students as an example with a very large geographic area to cover. You educate with total revenue/student and that is it except for grants and even they are in the budget.
My next question was Diane’s question.
Are we spending more to educate more expensive to educate students (special ed and esol)?
What I am getting at is the frequent effect of quoting the increased spending numbers. Some OP ED, or political speech, or such will say we are spending loads on education, more than ever, etc. The bit that follows that fact is often some reference (overt or veiled) to government waste, bloat, mismanagement, etc. as the cause of the increased spending. The next bit then suggests solutions to this “problem” or poorly run public schools.
If the direct source of much of the increased education spending is the type of students being served, that would tell a different story. And require different solutions.
If you follow the money it is all about fraud and theft. Today most school budgets use about 80-85% of the budget for employees wages and benefits. It is always what you do with the money. School Construction Bonds are where the big money is outside of charter schools and all the financial wiggling that can be done there such as hedge funds and buildings for charter schools which let the hedge funds double their money in 7 years instead of 12 years. I know budgets and this is how they roll. When CORE-CA presented the 10 year spreadsheets on 20 school districts I was told in private by a committee member that they had never seen this much data in this form for so many years before. I later learned that behind lines it caused an uproar. Amazing what documented facts will do. To help people with facts I have a one page set of directions to use the CDE website which lets you obtain the information going back 16 years for every school district in California and 11 years on every individual school in California. This takes away the mystery and makes people aware of the facts and how much they were lied to.
“Are we spending more to educate more expensive to educate students (special ed and esol)?”
Ang — The feds started tracking the number of students receiving special ed services in the mid-1970s. Those numbers increased throughout the 80s and shot up sharply in the 1990s. Most of that growth was in the category of “specific learning disabilities.”
However, the number of “special ed” students has fallen back a bit in the last several years, at least up to 2009-10. (See http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=64.) Yet during that same period, education spending was still increasing sharply, according to the NCES numbers. Ordinarily I would assume that would be attributable to pension contributions, which exploded in the 2000s, but the NCES numbers don’t seem to include pension contributions in its education expenditure data.
So, like I said to Diane, that would appear to be a big part of the story. But it’s not clear to me how big a part.
“If the direct source of much of the increased education spending is the type of students being served, that would tell a different story. And require different solutions.”
Absolutely, I agree. That’s why I think it’s important to understand where the money’s been going.
My last three years in special ed were at the high school level in a lower socio-economic community. I taught self-contained classes that were maxed out when I began teaching an expensive reading program. In fact, it took the school into the second semester before they managed to reduce the numbers to the legal limits my last year. Never mind that many of the students did not meet the minimum standards set by the program for inclusion. I was given students who could not function in the general education reading program as well as students whose behavior necessitated their removal from another special ed program. Every single one of my non-readers started reading. As you would expect, students who performed better initially tended to come closest to grade level performance. A few actually tested out. A few were ready to fly even though their test scores were not up to level. My biggest successes were my students who took another chance at a task that had given them nothing but humiliation. They began reading; they began learning. No test could fairly assess their triumph.
I lost my job to test results and budget numbers. I taught the maximum number of students (15/class) for six periods. I don’t know how I could have done more especially with the other duties that fall on special education teachers. General education teachers had up to 35 students in their classes; 30% could be special ed students. I can’t imagine what will happen if they remove all class size restrictions.
2old2tch: I don’t know what words would suffice in response to such a sober, realistic, heart-felt posting.
Thank you for all you did. And know that on this blog—just like in the classroom—KrazyTA has your back.
🙂
I have a feeling we would make a pretty good team.
This is off-topic, but a friend posted this article on Facebook, and I thought it was great. Sometimes, the stories we tell others about our impoverished students may create the wrong impressions of what we are able to do as teachers.
http://loveiswhatyoudo.com/2013/02/19/why-i-stopped-telling-guest-post-by-abby-norman/
From what the news is saying things are going to get worse with the sequester, if it happens.
I knew that it was just a matter of time before they went after special Ed! Hmm! Wonder if corporate charters are behind this!! After all when a parent takes the public school system to court and wins, a private school gets that money!! The larger the class sizes in spec ed the more lawsuits and the more money for private schools!!
This is an extension of RTI. Using the RTI law I can interfund transfer up to about 60% of the catagorical funding into the general fund to never be used specifically for those to whom it was intended, special education. On top of that the law states that you do not have to keep good records. This is total insanity. You cannot look at all special ed students as being the same. Some do not have large problems. Others will be lucky to be able to feed themselves. This is a tragedy in the making for those with the highest needs and those in the middle of needing specific special education.
Reblogged this on Students Are Enough and commented:
Removing class size limits for special education, and not increasing resources to engage students can ultimately be a setup for FAILURE in Illinois!
Destruction is their plan from the beginning. What are they thinking about????
An all out effort to destroy special education. IDEA says there must be a continuum of services. This is a definite violation of Federal Law. Where are the parents, where are the lawyers, where are the petitions?
So, how will the special education teachers case manage (assess, draft, meet, and revise) all of those IEPs, and design and deliver specially designed instruction in multiple areas for multiple ages of students? How will administrators handle attending all those meetings?
The unlimited caseloads are already a reality for the OT/SLP personnel in my district. The OT (1/2 day a week at my school) has been told by district supervisors to pull any combination of kids even if it is completely inappropriate–e.g., a 5th grade EBD kid with a Kindergarten DD kid.
Yes, even a class of 24 rowdy boys is difficult to control, even for the veteran teachers. It is very different than a class of 18 or 20. The dynamic changes. In a class of 30, the teacher is just standing up there talking…It doesn’t work. But again, you are using logic like this is a “debate.” Remember, this is all about getting rid of public schools and making them fail. If you want to ensure failure, then overload the classes, tie the tests to the common core, and most of us won’t be teaching five to ten years from now. Then, the reformers can say that the suburban schools stink too, which they will, and time for private school for everyone. This is as clear as a summer day. Most teachers I know (especially the best ones) are plotting their escape (retirement, career change, etc.) It just isn’t worth it anymore, is it?
Now is the time to turn up the heat on the corporatizers and privatizers not back down. They are really now in a position to take down their arguments as they really do not have any since in general they do worse and have no accountability. Just read the Stanford Study and then get the DOE OIG report on the lack of accountability of charter schools at any level in the states of Florida, Arizona and California. Then do not forget the “Correction Factor” which is correcting for comparison purposes with regular public schools the fact that charter schools cherry pick students and parents, do not have to follow a lot of ed code or local regulations, do not deal with behavioral problems, ELL, slow learners and special education. When you take into consideration these three areas privatization does not have a real leg to stand on.
With regard to Illinois’ money problems, if you haven’t read Diane’s post “More on the UNO Scandal” (yesterday, 2/25), go back, and you’ll understand what’s going on here. NINETY EIGHT MILLION DOLLARS to BUILD CHARTER SCHOOLS!!!!
(And just what portion of that money went to campaign contributors and no-bid contracts?) Ka-ching.
THAT’s where Illinois’ money is going.
Not to public school children.
That is currently under investigation. But the CEO of the non-profit UNO, Juan Rangal, was one of the campaign managers for Rahm Emmanual, the mayor, even though 501(c)3s are not supposed to get involved in political campaigning.
Our last two governors went to prison for corruption, now Jesse Jackson Jr. is on his way there, but I’ve heard nothing about an investigation of this fiasco. WTF?
Well hell hath no fury like a special education parent scorned, at least in my experience. These are some of the most impassioned people I’ve ever met in my life. So look out out Illinois.
I hope so. They are the ones who ultimately have their kids backs year after year. If they don’t fight, we lose.
Yes, you are absolutely correct! THAT–and ONLY that–is how we got 94-142. We also have some REALLY terrific special education lawyers in Illinois!
Well just do what we do in Louisiana: Have tiers of funding by disability (i.e. Private Vouchers schools and Charters can take less severely disabled students, get a pat on the back, and still get money). Or even better, give more money for kids for inclusion (i.e. Private Voucher schools and Charters can take kids with less severe disabilities, get a pat on the back, and not have to hire extra staff.) And I saved the best for last: Institute a Career Diploma that gives kids credit for working at Walmart for 2 years and hands them a diploma (i.e. increase graduation rate without actually increasing the graduation rate). We are getting great at gaming the system, if nothing else.
But…
There is always plenty of money for Pearson made and scored tests. Pre tests, posttests, end of course tests, benchmarks, in every subject including P.E and the list gets longer weekly!
We also buy all the “programs” that go with the tests. “Professional development” packages for teachers, student remediation programs…etc.
And don’t forget all the test security and monitoring that goes with this stuff. Loads of time and effort…at a cost.
We never “cannot afford” the latest student and teacher data tracking software. Although really lousy, cumbersome, non user friendly, almost retro interface, (Cheaply made?) the packages are not cheap.
We pay handsomely for all the tech types to oversee and de bug this stuff.
We have extra money for “Tax Credit Scholarships” in GA.
Never a bit of complaint about cost or lack of money or time.
But tax revenues are way down.
We are “broke”.
We have to “do more with less”.
We have to face “realities”.
So….
Increase class size.
Teachers buy their own classroom supplies (White board markers, copy paper etc.).
Cuts to support staff.
Cut funding to programs for students such as band and other after school activities.
Dramatically decreased the budget for science department supplies/ equipment.
Something is wrong here.
I just cannot quite put my finger on it.
Exactly. Anytime someone starts bringing up budget issues, look for smoke and mirrors.
Completely agree.
And yet so many people seem to buy this line of “reasoning”.
I have actually been told by people that all of the expensive things I mentioned are not the problem.
Then they go all zombie and talk about tough realities and hard choices.
Smoke and mirrors are very distracting/ confusing I suppose!
It’s good to scrutinize assertions about budgets, but you can’t just throw up your hands and say “they must be lying, because there seems to be plenty of money for tests.” To me, that’s the rhetorical mirror image of “oh, no matter how much money we spend on education, the unions will always say it’s not enough.” Nobody leaves the room smarter when this is the kind of discourse we have.
If you think that people leave the room “smarter” after experiencing your put-downs in discourses, think again.
Flerper @ 1:42
“but you can’t just throw up your hands and say “they must be lying, because there seems to be plenty of money for tests.”
That is not what I was trying to do.
I definitely am not throwing up my hands, and I don’t think anyone is necessarily lying about money.
Obfuscating?
Dissembling?
Yes, I think so.
I was trying to point out priorities.
We have money for the things we want to spend on.
All the things I mentioned cost a great deal. I see those things as unnecessary, wasteful spending. But spend we do. More money in the budget every year for those things. In the face of falling revenue, that money has to come from somewhere, right?
We choose to spend on them, but no one seems to want to talk about the cost or the worthwhileness of those expenditures. They seem to be “non negotiable”.
Thank you for your reply, Ang. Our priorities are what we value as a society, unfortunately.
Thank you for your comments to this community. I enjoy reading you.
It is sad, really.
Maybe our societal priorities are what we have been conned into?
The whole smoke and mirror thing Dienne mentioned does benefit some. They would have the power, money and connections to run quite a conn on the citizens.
OK..call me “conspiracy sister”.
😉
One more time, hopefully in the right place!
Thanks. I often feel like I should change my tagline to “Crazy Elementary Teacher”. I try to give an “in the trenches perspective” to our conversations, not being much of a policy wonk.
DE-Evolution at it’s best. If the measure of a civilization is how it treats its weakest members then we are taking 5 steps back for every step we took forward as a country…
“the measure of a civilization is how it treats its weakest members”
So true. Many voters are like adolescents who think they are invincible and don’t realize the likelihood that they, too, will one day be among the “weakest,” as seniors, the disabled and/or the poor. So, they keep electing corporate shills who are only concerned about protecting the 1%,
I could not understand why so many folks do not seem to be concerned about the inequitable distribution of wealth in this country. Then I recently taught a course that covered this matter and discovered how few of my college students even knew about it! I was shocked. I know, where were they during Occupy Wall Street? Many were across the globe. Apparently, this information needs to be a lot more widely distributed amongst the masses –and repeatedly.
Reblogged this on smalltownjules and commented:
Special education students continue to get short changed. Are we going back in time? I currently have 19 Learning Disabled, Emotionally Impaired, and other high needs students in a class. These students take the same state mandated tests. Their scores often bring down the overall school average. So does it make sense to add more in a class? Will suddenly their academic needs improve due to the presence of additional students? Is this the best solution to assisting disabled students in the general curriculum or prepare them for life after high school? No, no. no. Let’s stop balancing a budget on the backs of the neediest population. Better yet, stop balancing the budget with so called educational reform. Come in to my classroom, sit down and stay awhile. Wait, that would require an extra seat.
Wow, what responses. Retired now, but spent 32 wonderful years teaching Special Ed. from EMR, ED, PI, etc. Self-contained, Resource Room, and department chair.
Education is a three sided formula. For teaching to happen you need the buy in of teachers, parents and students. Teachers, who know their trade, parents, who support you and the student, and of course the student who tries. One supports the other. Many times the student and or parent don’t buy into the program, but that’s part of the job as the teacher to encourage them and help them. Not everyone will be a success, but that’s why we have many different types of programs. The problem today is that I see many parties not working together to build this triangle of learning. There were always a few, now it seems the norm. Each side needs to accept their responsibility and work on it rather than blaming the other. Principals, boards, districts, States, and Feds need to find ways to support this.
I am currently a special education teacher with autistic students. I have younger brother with autism and have true passion for helping others. However, the demands of my job are crazy. I have three TA’s/ paraprofessionals (they are the same, just fancier name) I have been a TA as well before going into teaching. I often spend from 8 to 315 with our neediest students without a break or lunch. And then when the students leave my day really begins. I am worn out and there is no support from the administration and the parents expectations are insane. I am looking to get out of teaching, the future does not look good in the US, let alone in Illinois. The truth is Illinois education system is becoming horrible with an even worse future outlook, as our state continues to cut budgets and state aid. Not to mention our pensions, I am getting out while there is still a chance to build another career. Teaching is becoming way to difficult for the amount of money that we are paid.