Newsgroups: ca.general
Subject: Re: California Public Schools Funding: A Materplan for Failure
From: ivler@mdcbbs.com (J.M. Ivler    ivler@mdcbbs.com)
Date: 17 Nov 92 12:53:13 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: EDS Unigraphics, Cypress CA
Nntp-Posting-User: loosli

In article <1e3iqqINNt42@mizar.usc.edu>, 
genzuk@mizar.usc.edu (Michael Genzuk) writes:
> California, the worlds sixth largest economy is on the brink of ruining 
> their public education system.  Many school districts, including Los Angeles,
> the nation's second largest are close to solvency.  Class sizes are the
> largest in the entire nation and per capita spending on students ranks
> about 50th.  

The fact missing is that the ratio of teachers to non-teachers in the district 
is one of the worst in the United States. [Note: in the ratio I am quoting the 
non-teachers were administartors and staff, not including bus drivers and 
janitorial staff.]

> What is to be done?  If California and indeed the U.S. is to maintain its
> leadership in the global community.  If California's students indeed the
> United State's students are to remain competitive in the global marketplace
> we had better sort out our priorities and decide where public investment
> should be.  

I couldn't agree more. Education is the key to success.

> California has gone from the number 1 education state in the United States 
> to the one with a rapidly decling reputation.  It has systematically declined
> under the administrations of Regan, Deukmenjian and now Wilson.  

Your politics is showing. Under Brown the schools did get more money, but it 
mostly went to specialized programs and that was a period of time when 
administration and staff increased while the number of actual teachers 
decreased. This is not a problem evoked by a republican or democratic 
administration, it is a problem that has been developed by a system that didn't 
require schools to maintain a decent ratio of teachers to non-teachers in order 
to obtain funding.

> Lawmakers
> have consistently been stifled by Gubenatorial vetoes and last minute
> antics by zealots in both the Assembly and the Senate.  The time has come
> for policy makers as well as voters to right the ship and put resources 
> where they belong.  In the education of California's citizens.  Throught this
> process they will empower the workforce to not only be competitive in the 
> 21st century but to take the lead.  There exists a framework for both Public 
> education K-12 and Higher education that could and should be second to
> none.  What is lacking is the commitment and resources that are necessary to
> assure the implementation of these systems.

Fine ideals, but before you start to throw more taxpayer money down a rathole, 
can I suggest that you start to look at the problems, rather than they 
symptoms. Throwing money at the symptoms won't eliminate the basic problem that 
we have created an administrators heaven. With the current ratio of 
non-teachers to teachers, no motter how much money you throw at this problem, 
it won't be releived.

In order to eliminate the "education gap" that exists between the people who 
are 30+ and their chilren who are attending school today, we have to start to 
inverst in TEACHERS not just education. This can be done by optimizing the 
ratio of teachers to non-teachers as well as paying a teacher what they are 
worth. In the first case, money for schools should be provide to any school 
district that has a minimum ratio of 6 teachers to 1 non-teacher (non teachers 
include all employees of a school district that do not teach at least 20 
students three hours per day minimum, but exclude janitors and bus drivers). 
This would eliminate 95% of all California public schools from receiving state 
funds. It would also highlight the immediate problem of excessive overhead and 
over administration. Remembers, schools are for teaching, and therefore should 
only require minimum administration with a majority of the staff being 
teachers (in the Los Angeles School District the current ratio is 2.5 teachers 
for each non-teacher).

Once the ratio has been corrected to what it was in 1960 (6-1) then we should 
fund the District at 100% of the request. In addition, the state should provide 
a fund for school districts to use to reward teachers who perform above and 
beyond. This reward bucket will allow participating school districts to have 
up to six teachers per school nominated for the rewards, which will be 
presented to two teachers per school. These rewards can be as high as 20% of 
the teachers salary.

So, to properly address the problem, using financial means, we should:
	1) re-establish the correct teacher to non-teacher ratio
	2) reward teachers for going above and beyond
	and an obvious 3) pay teachers what they are worth!

In the non-financial area, the State should establish minimum standards that 
are required befor a student can move into the following grades: 5th, 7th, 
9th and 11th. These standards would eliminate the passing on of unqualified 
students. It would take the wind out of the sails of parents who say that their 
children are being treated unfairly when being held back. It takes a subjective 
practice and makes it objective. It also ensures that students are graduating 
with basic rudamentry skills. By graduating students with the basic skills 
California will be a place employers want to be, as they won't have to provide 
rudamentry education to perspective employees. This increases a positive 
business climate and shows that the State is a willing partner with business in 
devloping the natural resources of the citizens.

J.M. Ivler
Candidate (Democrat) for the 46th California Congressional District - 1994
ivler@mdcbbs.com