Excellent Oregonian response piece today...

TheRogue · 09-04-2003, 11:37 PM

No (Maybe Some??) Child Left Behind

as long as they fit the mold, that is.....

TR

Straydog · 09-04-2003, 11:55 PM

Yes!! Very good first hand account of the problem.

Since our schools are currently underfunded and risk being denied even more funding if they do not have their kids passing these tests, we have schools being forced to teach to the test rather than teach to the students and knowledge they need to succeed in life.

Plus, the Government entities are not even on the page in terms of their testing! We have kids that have excelled on the State tests for CIM and CAM and then "failed" the Federal test for NCLB.

It is rediculous and will bite all of society in the rear down the road, whether you have kids or not.

roadsend · 09-06-2003, 07:18 PM

"Since our schools are currently underfunded and risk being denied even more funding if they do not have their kids passing these tests,"

What a dumb way to fund anything.
Could you imagine funding law enforcement according to the crime rate. If it goes up, funding goes down.
Or transportation; if accident rate in a district goes up, cut funding.
Or public health, or fire departments.

Stz ll · 09-07-2003, 09:22 AM

Our schools are not underfunded. The money is just not being spend wisely. Way to mush money paid to school administators.

Just my .02 worth.

[ 09-07-2003, 10:22 AM: Message edited by: Stz ll ]

roadsend · 09-07-2003, 06:07 PM

How much should school administrators get paid?

Straydog · 09-07-2003, 09:15 PM

"Too many administrators".

It is an age old excuse with no current facts to back it.

There are many school districts in the state and many, many more schools and school administrators.

Blanket generalities such as this are, in many cases, simply wrong.

Having studied our budget in the Three Rivers School District in great detail, I disagree that there are too many administrators.

As in most circumstances, when one really learns the facts and details it is very eye opening.

At first glance, one may ask why we have a principal, a vice principal and an athletic director at one of our highschools. (I did...) The answer is because we fired all but one of the councilors. Councilors will not and in some cases can not be called upon for disciplinary issues or take on "extra duty" such as monitoring after school functions like ball games and dances. On the other hand, administraters can take on these extra duty workloads and can act as councilors, not to mention class room teachers if need be.
So yea, on paper maybe it looks like we have too many administrators but when you analyze the big picture, we do not, in my opinion.

Administrative salaries vary based on the level, (elementary, middle, high school and dist. office) as well as the size and location of the respective school or district office.

Again, each district and school is different so to simply say there are too many or that they are overpaid is not practical.

[ 09-07-2003, 10:33 PM: Message edited by: Straydog ]

TheRogue · 09-08-2003, 04:39 AM

There ya go again, SD...interjecting facts and real experience into a topic!! :grin: How's anyone supposed to stay on their podium, if you just bring them down

Classic way to deal with a problem, isn't it!! Blame management..... Another unfunded federal mandate; that might maybe have a chance to work if it was actually funded!!!

TR

Straydog · 09-08-2003, 05:30 AM

TR,

I know, I know, the danged devil is always in the facts and the detail....

Yup, "No Child Left Behind"...... who can argue with that buzz title??

I agree, the concept is good but the reality is, without the money to implement it, it is creating more problems than good in my opinion. And my instincts tell me that it is really a can of worms in big, urban districts across our nation's cities.

GutshotApe · 09-08-2003, 05:40 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Straydog:
.....Having studied our budget in the Three Rivers School District in great detail, I disagree that there are too many administrators.

.......administraters can take on these extra duty workloads and can act as councilors, not to mention class room teachers if need be.

Administrative salaries vary based on the level, (elementary, middle, high school and dist. office) as well as the size and location of the respective school or district office.

What is the pupil/teacher ratio (class size)in your district? How about the pupil/administrator ratio? How do these numbers compare to ten, twenty, thirty years ago?

Teachers & administrators who supervise extracurricular activities receive compensation...or at least they do in some districts.

What do you pay administrator in your district? What is the salary range, and average, of teachers in your district? How many days per year do the administrators and teachers actually work? How does their entire compensation package, including PERS, compare to private sector salaries?

What percentage of your district's budget is spent on salaries & retirement and how does this compare to 10, 20, 30 yrs ago? :whazzup:

Straydog · 09-08-2003, 05:54 AM

GSA,

First off, why do you ask?

If you really care, which I question, come on down here and find out for yourself. :smile: You are retired and have lots of time to satisfy your curiosity.

I haven't the time nor the desire to play your games, either on here or via email, as I am busy raising a family, managing close to a 2 million dollar territory, keeping up with my place (kinda) and volunteering in an assortment of groups for the betterment of my state and region while looking for more time to put fish in the boat....(which I have been finding!! :grin: )

You, on the other hand, seem to have plenty of time to ask very time consuming detailed questions which in the past you have said didn't matter to you as you have no kids or much concern for public education. ("no dog in that fight" I believe were your eloquent words of disconcern......)

I suggest that your time could be better spent finding the answers yourself (as I have done) and then using your time to get involved and attempt to make it better.

Very rewarding, much more so than arguing on here.

[ 09-08-2003, 07:30 AM: Message edited by: Straydog ]

maggot · 09-08-2003, 06:22 AM

bottom line...........education is an investment in this countries future.

GutshotApe · 09-08-2003, 07:34 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Straydog:
GSA,

First off, why do you ask?

If you really care, which I question, come on down here and find out for yourself. :smile: You are retired and have lots of time to satisfy your curiosity.

I haven't the time nor the desire to play your games, either on here or via email, as I am busy raising a family, managing close to a 2 million dollar territory, keeping up with my place (kinda) and volunteering in an assortment of groups for the betterment of my state and region while looking for more time to put fish in the boat....(which I have been finding!! :grin: )

You, on the other hand, seem to have plenty of time to ask very time consuming detailed questions which in the past you have said didn't matter to you as you have no kids or much concern for public education. ("no dog in that fight" I believe were your eloquent words of disconcern......)

I suggest that your time could be better spent finding the answers yourself (as I have done) and then using your time to get involved and attempt to make it better.

Very rewarding, much more so than arguing on here.

StraydoggieDogg...a s a taxpayer, I have an interest in how our tax money is spent. This is a "Discussion Board"....you know...where people discuss issues. School funding is a current issue of interest to most Oregonians...kids in school or not.

You stated you have studied your district's budget in detail...which, as a school board member, you need to do. Previously you didn't know how many days your teachers work per year or how much they are paid. I assumed after your detailed study maybe you would know the answers now and could answer my questions without undue effort. You assert there aren't too many administrators in your district....well, how many are there compared to previous budget cycles? Other districts? How much compensation do they get?

As you alluded, the devil is in the details. And so far, all I've seen is a bunch of generalities...lots of smoke but little actual heat...and when asked for pertainent details...you throw up more smokescreen.

As far as time for "game playing"...you seem to have quite a lot of spare time judging by the posts you make here on ifish. You jumped in authoritatively on this thread...but when you are asked for details to back up your position you resort to demeaning putdowns....as usual.

As for having lots of free time because I'm retired....don't believe it. Between household chores, fishing, getting ready for hunting season...well, I just don't have all that much spare time left over. Just don't know how I held down a 50+ hr/week job for all those years.

Straydog · 09-08-2003, 08:00 AM

Gutshotappieape,

"No dog in this fight" were your words, not mine. You went on to say you really didn't care. Now you say you do. Just one of my frustrations with trying to discuss anything with you. You go back and forth like a pendulum.

I did study the budget in detail but unfortunately I don't still have the information and comparisons for the last thirty years on the top of my head. Go ahead, call me a hypocrit as you did in your email and used to do on here, I learned to expect it from you.

I guess if you want honest dialogue with me it it is going to require an end to name calling, again either here or via email, and then some time for me to be convinced that your motives are really to gain information and not, as has been your ongoing history, an attempt to make me look bad.

As for the time element, I work out of my home office on a computer with windows............ there is lots of work being done between posting on here. Multitasking is one of my strong points.

So tell us, given the world is so vastly different than it was 30 years ago, of what relevence is the 30 year comparison of class room ratios and teacher/administrator ratios today?

Again I ask, "why do you ask?" (back to an attempt at real dialogue, not name calling and arguing...

[ 09-08-2003, 09:01 AM: Message edited by: Straydog ]

Cool Texan · 09-08-2003, 08:00 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by GutshotApe:

As you alluded, the devil is in the details. And so far, all I've seen is a bunch of generalities...lots of smoke but little actual heat...and when asked for pertainent details...you throw up more smokescreen.

As far as time for "game playing"...you seem to have quite a lot of spare time judging by the posts you make here on ifish. You jumped in authoritatively on this thread...but when you are asked for details to back up your position you resort to demeaning putdowns....as usual.

GSA, its a repetitive theme. That's why I have adjusted my filters.

Straydog · 09-08-2003, 08:07 AM

GSA, Cool,

Our budget document is 151 pages long and entails 16 schools as well as 14 other departments that are itemized. It deals with around 40 million dollars. Please excuse me for not having it memorized.

If I NEED this info. I can source it. I don't NEED this info. to appease either of you.

However, it is all public information and I encourage you to source and find any and all of the info your little hearts desire.

Cool,

You have jumped into this thread and, as per ususal, offered zip in terms of substance regarding the topic. Kind of like how you jump into threads with derogatory icons and then have the gull to add your "yea! what mom said!" when you succesfully tick people off and Jen or another moderator has to ask us to chill.

If you have nothing to say, shut up! [img]graemlins/idea.gif[/img]

[ 09-08-2003, 09:16 AM: Message edited by: Straydog ]

DanS · 09-08-2003, 10:05 AM

Quote:

StraydoggieDogg Gutshotappieape

Might I make the suggestion that we NOT ALLOW members' monikers to be misspelled as an underhanded insult??

And CT......is this when we tell you to grow up?

[ 09-08-2003, 11:06 AM: Message edited by: DanS ]

Cool Texan · 09-08-2003, 10:33 AM

Dan, you can tell me whatever you like, though I don't see how it applies. I was simply agreeing with GSA's earlier post. He asked SD for specifics, and SD declined to provide them. Seems to me that if you are going to reference specifics, you should be prepared to provide them...which was not done, and is frequently not done. Not stoking any fires, simply agreeing that references to facts should accompany facts. If someone makes a claim about something, and has facts/details to support them, I'd be the first in line to applaud them...no matter who it is.

Straydog · 09-08-2003, 10:42 AM

Cool,

Please explain to us where I said I had student/teacher ratios or student/administrator ratios for 10, 20, and 30 years ago or share what school district budgets would provide that information and why. Same with comparisons to the private sector. Do you expect to find that in a school budget? Would you expect someone that has stated they have studied a school budget to know those comparisons? If so, why? Did GSA pose questions that you would really expect to find spelled out in a budget document?

Also, where did I say I had memorized any of these or the other questions put forth by GSA. I said I have studied our budget in detail, which I have. I did not say I memorized each detail or that I did a historical search on all of the comparisons for 10, 20 and 30 years ago, now did I?

Also, please explain what volunteers would be able to, off the top of their heads, recite those numbers from memory.

Then, please tell us why a person that has previously stated they "don't have a dog in that fight" and also gone on to say they really don't care, would ask for such detailed historical non-relevant data if not to make trouble.

If you can give sound answers to my simple questions and sound reasons for GSA inquiring, I will buy you both beers.

For the record, as of last week, it was looking like our elementary schools were going to top out at around 28 kids per teacher and our middle and high schools around 32. It is not possible to give exact numbers as enrollment doesn't stablize until after the first week or two of school. I could look up the number of teachers and administrators for each school and give those numbers but I seriously don't believe either you or GSA are really concerned, rather taking advantage of an opportunity to discredit me as has been the trend from both of you.

Maybe you can change my mind......... why are you concerned about the details of the Three Rivers School District in So. Oregon? If you are not, in terms of this thread, what was the value of you chiming in on GSA's put down of me?

[ 09-08-2003, 12:24 PM: Message edited by: Straydog ]

DanS · 09-08-2003, 10:56 AM

CT,

I think the "blanket statement" made first was that OR schools are top heavy with too many administrators. SD says they are not.

Is it fair to ask SD for proof, and not the person who made the claim SD disagreed with?

Asking for proof from only one side shows that you already have your mind made up, so why would SD bother posting figures?

Cool Texan · 09-08-2003, 12:16 PM

Dan, in these discussions I'd love to see ANYONE show hard facts. Makes the arguments more palatable. However, from what I saw, the comment was made "As in most circumstances, when one really learns the facts and details it is very eye opening." Then when asked questions regarding those facts and details, the response was dodging....asking why he cared, personal jabs about retirement, not having the time to answer the questions, etc. Sort of like when two kids are talking about something and one makes a comment the other doesnt understand...but they will say "Yeah, I know what that means...but I'm not going to tell you"....cuz they dont know. I'm not saying SD doesn't know what he is talking about...not at all. However, to say something like the earlier quote, then not offer anything to support it but the usual personal insults leaves one to discount that persons credibility.

As for why not go after the person who offered up the blanket statement....their statement was made, again with no facts, but never again addressed. Meanwhile, the rest of the thread spiraled on and on. Should the other person re-emerge on this thread, then yes, I'd be asking them for data to support their thread. Maybe it exists, or maybe it is just their gut feel. Who knows.

As for making my mind up already...that couldn't be further from the truth. However, no one has given out any facts, figures or truths on the matter.

DanS · 09-08-2003, 12:48 PM

OK, then........my mistake. And compliments to you for keeping an open mind.

GutshotApe · 09-08-2003, 01:16 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Straydog:
Gutshotappieape,

I guess if you want honest dialogue with me it it is going to require an end to name calling, again either here or via email, and then some time for me to be convinced that your motives are really to gain information and not, as has been your ongoing history, an attempt to make me look bad.

I'm not trying to make you look bad, Straydog...you do that very well without any assistance from others.

And here's the email you are referreing to...

Quote:

Originally posted by Straydog (GI Joes thread): I do though, try to be descreet enough to not wash my dirty laundry in public
unless I feel there is genuine public good to be gained. I honestly don't feel there is going to be a lot of public benefit from bashing a whole chain based on the performance of a few stores or a few individuals within a few stores."

And this was my private email to you:

Quote:

Your hypocricy is showing again, Straydoggie....you don't seem to have any trouble bashing a whole industry (forestry) based on the performance of a few operators or individuals (your oft-cited but unspecified complaints of the terrible clearcutting example somewhere near you)...

To the extent that you feel insulted, I apologize for using the sobriquet "Straydoggie", and promise I won't do it again

, Straydog. But the record shows what you posted WAS hypocritical...and all I did was point that out...privately, I thought.

Straydog · 09-08-2003, 07:34 PM

Cool,

The details asked for are not details that one would expect to know from a school budget in my mind.

Of course, neither you nor GSA seem to care to address that.

Straydog · 09-08-2003, 08:13 PM

GSA,

Why do you ask the questions you do regarding the budget?

What relevance does 10, 20 and 30 year comparisons have?

What budget would give details comparing school district jobs to the private sector? Afterall, "it's just a budget".

If indeed you were not attempting to give me a bad time or make me look bad even though you have noted I do that my well myself, you surely have the answers readily available yet seem to refuse to address the questions.

Further I see nothing in your derogatory comments that prove I am any more a hypocrit than not, simply your opinion.

But let's get back on topic...... please let us know why one would be expected to know the information you asked about from working with a budget?

If you are just trying to have a discussion, then why are you and your Cool Texan buddy ignoring my questions? My answer is I don't know off the top of my head. Now it is your turn to anwer my questions... Remember, it is a discussion board, discuss away.

[ 09-08-2003, 09:17 PM: Message edited by: Straydog ]

Straydog · 09-08-2003, 08:22 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Cool Texan:
the comment was made "As in most circumstances, when one really learns the facts and details it is very eye opening." Then when asked questions regarding those facts and details, the response was dodging....asking why he cared, personal jabs about retirement, not having the time to answer the questions, etc.

I have answered the questions I could without having to spend time researching and said "I don't know off the top of my head" concerning the others.

Now it would seem logical that you would answer my questions. Why would anyone expect me to know the comparisons asked for from working on a budget? It is you that has stated more than once "it is just a budget". That is true,
it is not a historical comparison of past budgets vs current budgets. It is not a salary comparison of school administrators vs private sector jobs. Why would a person ask those questions of another in terms of dealing with a school's budget and expect the answers to have been found in said budget?

By the way, I have reposted the original detail I offered as an example of how knowing more about the details of the budget changed my way of thinking. Beyond breaking the law and naming names I can't get much more detailed than this. Perhaps you missed it in your quest for good, meaningful discussion:

Quote:

At first glance, one may ask why we have a principal, a vice principal and an athletic director at one of our highschools. (I did...) The answer is because we fired all but one of the councilors. Councilors will not and in some cases can not be called upon for disciplinary issues or take on "extra duty" such as monitoring after school functions like ball games and dances. On the other hand, administraters can take on these extra duty workloads and can act as councilors, not to mention class room teachers if need be.
So yea, on paper maybe it looks like we have too many administrators but when you analyze the big picture, we do not, in my opinion.

[ 09-09-2003, 05:55 AM: Message edited by: Straydog ]

GutshotApe · 09-09-2003, 05:36 AM

Well Straydog, you asserted "our schools are currently underfunded"...and I, like many, many others wonder if that's true.

I read somewhere that 86% of school budgets in Oregon go for teacher & admin salaries and PERS retirements. If that's not the correct number maybe you know what it is. But if its anywhere close to correct, then that would be a logical place to look for ways to cut costs. I've heard of school superintendents being paid 6-figure salaries...of curriculum coordinators and other admin types making nearly as much (just what do these people really do to deserve such generous pay?)...of teachers who work only 175-180 days/year pulling down 60k or more (I know, the beginners don't get that much, but many do (and that's why I wondered if you knew the average for your district). And then there's the retirement at nearly full pay (sometimes over 100% of ending pay) after only 30 yrs. When you look at the total compensation package including all benefits and the total time worked, there is the appearance of an overpaid and underworked group of people...relative to society in general.

This situation developed over many years and is, in my opinion, the result of allowing teachers to unionize. The OEA is the largest labor union in Oregon and the most powerful. They have pretty much gotten their way in Salem on many issues...no legislator crosses the OEA and lives to tell about it. The OEA hires skillful lobbyists and skillful contract negotiators. School boards, on the other hand, are often composed of less skillful negotiators...who often run unopposed, are there for a short time and sometimes not capable of seeing what's happening...the "big picture". Meanwhile, the OEA is a continuing presence...and when contracts are negotiated, the OEA comes out on top time after time. Their mantra is "support our schools and our children" but what they really are saying is "pay me more money". School boards have said "OK". It isn't the fault of any specific school board...its a cumulative thing that has built up over time across the state.

Not only does the OEA seem to control the legislature but in many districts they seem to control the school boards...to the point that the teachers and administrators are "held harmless" by board members and others...and the only solution to the so-called funding problem is to raise taxes yet again.

So when I read of a school board member who thinks schools are "underfunded", I ask "compared to what?"...and that's why it would be interesting & appropriate to compare today's staffing/student ratio with that of the past. It would also seem worthwhile to consider merging with adjacent districts to cut costs. In fact, since the state provides most school funding, maybe we should do away with local school boards and local district administration entirely and really save on administration overhead.

Yes SDog, fielding pesky questions about budget items, personnel costs, and student/staff ratios takes time & effort. But that's what your staff members are for...the district supt. ought to have all those numbers at his fingertips and all you need do is ask the guy (or gal). And if he doesn't, he should be fired at once.

[ 09-09-2003, 06:40 AM: Message edited by: GutshotApe ]

Straydog · 09-09-2003, 06:00 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by GutshotApe:

Yes SDog, fielding pesky questions about budget items, personnel costs, and student/staff ratios takes time & effort. But that's what your staff members are for...the district supt. ought to have all those numbers at his fingertips and all you need do is ask the guy (or gal). And if he doesn't, he should be fired at once.

GSA,

I don't disagree with a lot of what you said but you are avoding my question in a sense, yet providing the answer in another.

You came on here and gave me grief for not having the answers to your laborious questions ready to provide in the instance of the internet. Yet now you say that the Supt. and staff should be able to provide those answers. The supt. and staff are not "Straydog" and are not discussing this on Ifish.......... Nice dodge, but you still have not cleared up the fact that, in my opinion, your goal was to give me a bad time and at that you have certainly succeeded. Enjoy your accomplishment.

Straydog · 09-09-2003, 06:04 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by GutshotApe:
You stated you have studied your district's budget in detail...which, as a school board member, you need to do. Previously you didn't know how many days your teachers work per year or how much they are paid. I assumed after your detailed study maybe you would know the answers now and could answer my questions without undue effort.

Quote:

But that's what your staff members are for...the district supt. ought to have all those numbers at his fingertips and all you need do is ask the guy (or gal). And if he doesn't, he should be fired at once.

And you call me the hypocrit......... If I should know the answers, why come back and say I should ask staff?

You remind me of the proverbial Christmas Goose...

[ 09-09-2003, 07:10 AM: Message edited by: Straydog ]

TheRogue · 09-09-2003, 06:30 AM

Quote:

So when I read of a school board member who thinks schools are "underfunded", I ask "compared to what?"...and that's why it would be interesting & appropriate to compare today's staffing/student ratio with that of the past.

I'd agree with this, as long as you take into account all the mandated stuff that exists now such as CIM/CAM, No Child Left Behind, etc., and take into account the society of today with it's lack of respect for authority and bashing of public employees, and it's affect on teachers.

Quote:

In fact, since the state provides most school funding, maybe we should do away with local school boards and local district administration entirely and really save on administration overhead.

Most people agree that one of the big problems with schools today is lack of local control, and centralized funding. Making it even more state-centered certainly won't solve any problems!!

TR

Straydog · 09-09-2003, 06:42 AM

Quote:

In fact, since the state provides most school funding, maybe we should do away with local school boards and local district administration entirely and really save on administration overhead.

Less local control of schools is a big part of our problem today.

BTW, school boards are not paid positions so the savings there would be little. Yea, they buy us bad pizza when we have meetings from 5:30 to 10:00 but otherwise the perks are few.

That oversight wouldn't be yet another slight of hand slam, now would it?

Paranoid? Yup, due to past experience....... :smile:

[ 09-09-2003, 07:44 AM: Message edited by: Straydog ]

GutshotApe · 09-09-2003, 06:44 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Straydog:Having studied our budget in the Three Rivers School District in great detail, I disagree that there are too many administrators.

OK Straydog...if you don't know the answers (teacher/pupil ratio, administrator/pupil ratio, teacher & administrator salaries, number of days worked, etc) after having studied the budget "in great detail" then, if you wanted to back up your assertion that there aren't "too many" administrators (and continue with the discussion) without inordinant effort on your part, you could do as I suggested and ask the district supt. who, after all, works for the board...

Or, we could just drop it...as I intend to do, starting right now.

Straydog · 09-09-2003, 06:46 AM

I guess you missed the student/teacher ratios posted above. Must have missed it in your quest for good solid information.

As for dropping my discussion with you on this topic, you're two steps behind me.......... again.

:tongue:

[ 09-09-2003, 07:49 AM: Message edited by: Straydog ]