Dirty, Rotten Teachers
In his latest column, Dave tackles the issue of student funding in Portland and comes to the conclusion that we spend too much on students. At $7,921 per-student in Portland, Dave believes that is far too much, and that we should just knock it off.
*Of course*, the reason why our spending per student is so "high" is because of teachers. Those dirty, rotten teachers. With their salaries that fit with the national average of master's degree earners and benefits packages bargained for in lieu of pay raises- all adding to the misery of spending $8000/student in Portland.
I don't understand Republicans. It seems the concept of public school teachers being able to live comfortable, middle-class lifestyles is "quaint" and "old-fashioned." It hearkens back to a by-gone era, like the 1950s. Which is, of course, where Republicans would prefer to lead us with all their other policies and legislation. Just not for teachers' salaries. For that they'd prefer if teachers lived with the homeless at Dignity Village. Of course, that would be granting teachers too much dignity.
Republicans base their perspectives in ideology and, like all ideologues, they find that these perspectives fail to compute when applied to the real world. 'Market-based' solutions are sought in situations in which they don't apply. If you read between the lines, its clear Dave is calling for one in regards to Portland Public Schools. Perhaps something similar to what was posted on over at NW Republican:
For the sake of full disclosure, I must admit that my father was a public teacher. Although that may explain partly why I'm not sympathetic to Reinhard's point (its mostly because he's a blowhard and a lousy writer that I disagree with him) I also bring a personal perspective to this issue. Some fifteen years ago or so my father had to take a second-job to make bills meet during the recession that occurred under the first Bush administration. After a day of teaching high school, he worked behind the counter at a convenience store. Besides having no time available to be a father and commit to family life, he also was unable to concentrate on creating lesson plans and grading homework. Working another job while teaching full-time was a detriment to not only his children, but also to the children of the community he taught in. Think about that, and think if we want a similar fate to befall Portland's teachers.
Another thing: although Dave makes an issue of the 'alarming' amount paid per school in Portland, I went to schoolmatters.com and looked around for a little bit. Yes, Portland spends more than other cities with a similar size, but most of these cities- from Nashville to New Orleans to Sacramento- spend an amount per student within the $7,000 to $8,000 range, with Portland finding itself near the top of that range ($7,921). And these cities pale in comparison to the amount spent by Cleveland per student ($10,200)- with 75,000 fewer residents. Even if Portland wanted to spend the average national amount per student, it would have to increase its funding $1,200 to $9,136. And as this column is about decreasing Portland Public School's funds, you know that's not going to be proposed by Dave.
Dave can make a stink about how Portland spends too much money due to greedy teachers all he wants. But if nine percent of Oregon's $666 million tax "kicker" was earmarked to Portland's schools then the $57 million funding gap would be covered and the topic would be moot. And besides- is the amount of funding per student even an issue? Is any amount "too much" for our kids? Wouldn't it be a mark of pride to point out that we spend more on our children's education then other communities? And a mark of shame if we spent less?
Just askin'.
*Of course*, the reason why our spending per student is so "high" is because of teachers. Those dirty, rotten teachers. With their salaries that fit with the national average of master's degree earners and benefits packages bargained for in lieu of pay raises- all adding to the misery of spending $8000/student in Portland.
I don't understand Republicans. It seems the concept of public school teachers being able to live comfortable, middle-class lifestyles is "quaint" and "old-fashioned." It hearkens back to a by-gone era, like the 1950s. Which is, of course, where Republicans would prefer to lead us with all their other policies and legislation. Just not for teachers' salaries. For that they'd prefer if teachers lived with the homeless at Dignity Village. Of course, that would be granting teachers too much dignity.
Republicans base their perspectives in ideology and, like all ideologues, they find that these perspectives fail to compute when applied to the real world. 'Market-based' solutions are sought in situations in which they don't apply. If you read between the lines, its clear Dave is calling for one in regards to Portland Public Schools. Perhaps something similar to what was posted on over at NW Republican:
What if... before the end of the current contract, the board of PPS was approached by a group of accredited non-union teachers (just, say, as equally qualified as those they've got now, large enough to replace all current union teachers) who said: "We'll work for 15% less in total compensation."Although that creates an interesting hypothetical situation, we should acknowledge the realities of school funding, and the lack of it. And that is the community as a whole suffers when funding per student is decreased.
Call it a "bid" for the contract.
For the sake of full disclosure, I must admit that my father was a public teacher. Although that may explain partly why I'm not sympathetic to Reinhard's point (its mostly because he's a blowhard and a lousy writer that I disagree with him) I also bring a personal perspective to this issue. Some fifteen years ago or so my father had to take a second-job to make bills meet during the recession that occurred under the first Bush administration. After a day of teaching high school, he worked behind the counter at a convenience store. Besides having no time available to be a father and commit to family life, he also was unable to concentrate on creating lesson plans and grading homework. Working another job while teaching full-time was a detriment to not only his children, but also to the children of the community he taught in. Think about that, and think if we want a similar fate to befall Portland's teachers.
Another thing: although Dave makes an issue of the 'alarming' amount paid per school in Portland, I went to schoolmatters.com and looked around for a little bit. Yes, Portland spends more than other cities with a similar size, but most of these cities- from Nashville to New Orleans to Sacramento- spend an amount per student within the $7,000 to $8,000 range, with Portland finding itself near the top of that range ($7,921). And these cities pale in comparison to the amount spent by Cleveland per student ($10,200)- with 75,000 fewer residents. Even if Portland wanted to spend the average national amount per student, it would have to increase its funding $1,200 to $9,136. And as this column is about decreasing Portland Public School's funds, you know that's not going to be proposed by Dave.
Dave can make a stink about how Portland spends too much money due to greedy teachers all he wants. But if nine percent of Oregon's $666 million tax "kicker" was earmarked to Portland's schools then the $57 million funding gap would be covered and the topic would be moot. And besides- is the amount of funding per student even an issue? Is any amount "too much" for our kids? Wouldn't it be a mark of pride to point out that we spend more on our children's education then other communities? And a mark of shame if we spent less?
Just askin'.
posted by true_slicky at 11:56 PM
1 Comments:
Dave keeps writing columns using these average per pupil expenditure figures to make his point, which is always, of course, to blast Portland public schools and teachers. He might think for a moment about how misleading averages can be unless supplemented by additional info. If Paul Allen and Dave were in the same room, for example, their average net worth would be in the zillions of dollars, but I don't think Dave could then quit his job and live off his wealth.
Post a Comment
<< Home