ADVERTISEMENT

Allow me to ask a honest, bipartisan question

Originally posted by Duck_walk:
Probably not a good question because I pray every day that Miller doesn't reproduce.
I guess you could pray that he dies because I already have.
 
Originally posted by millerbleach:
Originally posted by wcowherd:
If the $300k number is $10k per student, I don't think that's unreasonable when you take into account that pays all the teachers and support staff salaries and plus textbooks plus technology, I think you could do a lot worse. I certainly don't think a school district like, say, miller spends too much per student.
Yeah, they could waste a lot more....duh.
Textbooks and technology are not every year expenses.
As I said, there is way too much waste and red tape.
Salaries don't come close to exhausting 10K/student.
Facilities are a big expense but even 1K/student/year would be more than sufficient to cover that.
I'm talking national average not a specific school.
There aren't textbooks that need replacing every year?
You don't think schools need to pay for Internet every year?
You don't think schools need to pay for IT support?

I want to get to the most astounding comment you've made in quite some time..."1k/student/year.

Let's take Miller as an example. Miller has an enrollment of 152 kids, so under the millerbleach plan, that's $152k for the entire district. If you say that the median teacher's salary in Miller should be $30k per year (that's a pretty pathetic average salary), then Miller can pay for...5 teachers, and nothing else.

LOL. That might be your best idea ever!
 
How much for Private school tuition?? Is it more than the $8500 that a public school requires.
 
Originally posted by wcowherd:


Originally posted by millerbleach:

Originally posted by wcowherd:
If the $300k number is $10k per student, I don't think that's unreasonable when you take into account that pays all the teachers and support staff salaries and plus textbooks plus technology, I think you could do a lot worse. I certainly don't think a school district like, say, miller spends too much per student.
Yeah, they could waste a lot more....duh.
Textbooks and technology are not every year expenses.
As I said, there is way too much waste and red tape.
Salaries don't come close to exhausting 10K/student.
Facilities are a big expense but even 1K/student/year would be more than sufficient to cover that.
I'm talking national average not a specific school.
There aren't textbooks that need replacing every year?
You don't think schools need to pay for Internet every year?
You don't think schools need to pay for IT support?

I want to get to the most astounding comment you've made in quite some time..."1k/student/year.

Let's take Miller as an example. Miller has an enrollment of 152 kids, so under the millerbleach plan, that's $152k for the entire district. If you say that the median teacher's salary in Miller should be $30k per year (that's a pretty pathetic average salary), then Miller can pay for...5 teachers, and nothing else.

LOL. That might be your best idea ever!
I guess they never taught reading at any of your many ecucational institutions.

1K/yr/student for FACILITIES. Facilities is property, structures, and furnishings.

Very few textbooks need replaced every year. Every year textbooks must be peplaced but on a rotating basis. You might buy textbooks for 25% of classes each year.
There are upkeep or maintenance costs in everything (including technology) but they pale in comparrison to initial or replacement costs.

I never expected you to agree with anything I said but thought you could at least read well enough to understand what was said.
 
Originally posted by generalt:
How much for Private school tuition?? Is it more than the $8500 that a public school requires.
It varies greatly from school to school. Some are far below the 11K/student national average the US spends. Some are 25K/yr. It depends largely on what you are paying for. Basic education, extra-curriculars, prestige, location, etc. Several rural Christian schools are 2K/yr or less. Many churches have facilities that are maintained already. Many teachers forego public schools in favor of privates to get more freedom to teach over babysitting problem kids whose parents could care less.
 
Yes. It can be higher or lower depending upon the level of services provided.

Most private schools also use public school services in STL for providing special school type of services. Also you have to account for subsidization (some schools are church subsidized) and also for schools that bring a few kids in on scholarship. Also have to account for how fees/extras are handled - book fees, cost of lunches, etc.

In general the bare bones religious schools tend to be cheaper because they offer fewer services and pay the teachers very little. The high end schools are much, much more (rossman, priory, micds, new city, etc.) Private schools have costs which vary with the desired level of service.

If you look at charter schools, which operate under public school mandates but often have more freedom in terms of how they spend money, their costs usually aren't materially less than the public schools.

I think schools could spend money more wisely but the idea that you can manage technology, utilities, food, books, and fixtures for 1k or less seems crazy low to me.
 
Originally posted by Neutron Monster:
Yes. It can be higher or lower depending upon the level of services provided.

Most private schools also use public school services in STL for providing special school type of services. Also you have to account for subsidization (some schools are church subsidized) and also for schools that bring a few kids in on scholarship. Also have to account for how fees/extras are handled - book fees, cost of lunches, etc.

In general the bare bones religious schools tend to be cheaper because they offer fewer services and pay the teachers very little. The high end schools are much, much more (rossman, priory, micds, new city, etc.) Private schools have costs which vary with the desired level of service.

If you look at charter schools, which operate under public school mandates but often have more freedom in terms of how they spend money, their costs usually aren't materially less than the public schools.

I think schools could spend money more wisely but the idea that you can manage technology, utilities, food, books, and fixtures for 1k or less seems crazy low to me.
Of course it's crazy low. It's absolutely insane.

I thought miller might default to that position after the lunacy of his numbers was brought to light without realizing how ridiculous $1k/per student ever for facilities is. Miller has no idea what goes into maintaining a school system, much less anything else that deals with education. He's the exact reason it's stupid to let local municipalities determine curriculum, budget, and staffing for local school.s
 
Transportation is a great expense, I think many have overlooked that cost. Missouri is at $8500 per student could they decrease it yes, but resources for students are very expensive.
 
I'm more interested in a data driven discussion about how can we do better with what we have. There are some things that are likely better uses of money than others, but how often do you hear a cost/benefit analysis take place?
 
Everything in education is driven by
what I call "Management by Best Seller"
Someone writes a book claiming it is based on research which just happens to support their agenda and the next thing you know every mindless administrator in the country is having a workshop that every teacher has to attend, even master teachers who are already doing a great job. It used to drive me nuts when they have every single teacher take the exact same training whether you were a rookie or the best damned teacher the world has ever seen.
 
Originally posted by Neutron Monster:

I think schools could spend money more wisely but the idea that you can manage technology, utilities, food, books, and fixtures for 1k or less seems crazy low to me.
Can you not read either or is this another strawman.
I never said food or curriculum was in the $1000/student.
I said FACILITIES. Facilities are property, structure and furnishings (desks, toilets, ovens, etc.).
 
A class of 30 would require a teacher....50K.
That leaves 250K. Multiply that by 10 classes and you have 2.5 million to do everything else for 300 students! Take out 300K for loan payments on facilities (1k/student enough to cover about a $7 million loan) and you have 2.2 million left. Take 500K for Custodians, cooks, etc. (20 people at 25K) and you have 1.7 million left. Superintendant, Principle, Secretaries, Nurse, Counselor, etc....400K. That leaves 1.3 million. That's a lot of books, utilities, etc.

I know that is 30 per class but it's also 50K. That also assumes you aren't starting from scratch (a school exists already).
 
Lol at teachers costing only 50k. I want to run a business in this magical world with no employment costs besides wages.
 
How many teachers does 2nd grade need?
30 per class equals 10 teachers for 300. If you have more teachers you wouldn't have 30/class. I never said there were 10 grades just 10 classrooms.
 
Not a lot of teachers making 50K either.
There's still 1.3 million left to buy insurance and pay work comp. That probably only leaves 1 million for books....whatever will I do?
 
I know you said etc. So I am guessing that includes busses, sports, special education services, testing, food, (by the way utilities are not cheap!)
 
Not to mention I dont want schools with 30 kids per class when class size is something we have good data on. Smaller classes improve educational outcomes.
 
You and I and anyone who has ever taught knows that classroom size makes a huge difference. But I'm telling you, the management by best seller folks say it's not true.

The school reformers have crafted their research that says classroom size doesn't matter to great teachers and they have sold that concept. I've heard it in more than one workshop. It's total BS.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT