[Vision2020] School District Math

[Sue Hovey]

    Donovan makes a comparison one hears only too often today regarding the levy and its purpose.  That's the pull between vocational and other education.  His figure of 80% non college bound and 20% college bound is skewed for a number of reasons, but it isn't my purpose to mess with it.  I would simply ask:

    What part of an academic education should those not college bound forego?  A good grounding in math?  So many vocational-technical careers are based in mathematic principals.  Being a good writer--one who uses literary conventions (spelling, punctuation, grammar) correctly, in order to communicate effectively in an increasingly interactive world?  An introduction to good literature and the mental stimulation it provides?  A sound knowledge of basic scientific principles, and the theories on which they are based?  A knowledge of the history, not only of our country, but the history and cultural underpinnings of current nations and the governments which preceeded them?  Foreign language?  Art?  Music?  Are not all these offerings equally important and vital to the proper education of all our students, regardless of the career paths they choose, sometimes after heading down one path only to find they really want to be somewhere else? 

    It concerns me when people begin to make significant distinctions among students and their intellectual needs, based on educational plans that could tie them to lifetime career paths they may later find did not prepare them for the life they really want to lead.  The best education for students is one that gives them ample preparation to sieze the opportunities which appeal to them in their 20s and 30s and not be limited by the choices they made, or even worse, those that were made for them, when they were 15 or 16. 

Sue Hovey       
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Donovan Arnold 
  To: Glenn Schwaller ; vision2020 at moscow.com 
  Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2007 9:36 PM
  Subject: Re: [Vision2020] School District Math


  Dr. Weitz is not only correct about the lawsuit because it is stealing from the public, but he is also correct in bring attention to the notion that the School District doesn't want to spend money and resources on the 80% of students that will not be college graduates and will be working a vocational job. Is it fair to spend 80% of the pie on 20% of the kids? I think not. MSD is practicing discrimination. 

  Best,

  Donovan

  PS. The poor nutritional value of school lunches are another example of poor decisions being made by the public school system to prepare children for a quality life. 

  Glenn Schwaller <vpschwaller at gmail.com> wrote:
    MPDN page 7B, Tuesday May 29

    Apparently the Whitepine School District has "proposed to increase its
    School Lunch Prices by an amount that exceeds 105% of the fee charged
    last year. The proposed increase of 25 cents per meal is 9% above the
    105% of the fees charged the previous year." Huh??

    2006-2007: K-6 $1.75 7-12 $2.25 adult $2.75

    2007-2008: K-6 $2.00 7-12 $2.50 adult $3.00

    My abacus tells me this reflects a 14.3%, 11.1% and 9.01% increase,
    repsectively. So the grade school kids are subsidizing the adult
    lunches?? Whoa Vizzies! You were right! When Weitz roars, it's the
    kids who'll pay!

    But wait! The proposed increase is "9% above the 105% of the PREVIOUS
    year". This means the 2005-2006 school lunches were 85 cents, $1.10,
    and $1.34 for K-6, 7-12, and adults? So THIS years' lunches exceed
    LAST years' lunches by 105%, (holy crap! and you're complaing about
    gas price increases??) And NEXT years' lunches will exceed THIS
    years' lunches by 9% (or is it 11.1%? or is it 14.3%??) So what's
    the "exceeds 105% of the fee charged LAST year"?? Or is it 9% of the
    105%, above the 105% of the last year before the previous year??

    Was this written by one of the razor sharp legal minds that penned the
    current levy language?? Possibly they were educated by a
    less-than-stellar-can't-be-bothered-with-lesson-plans-yet-unionized-and-tenured
    math teacher who, in the wake of budget cuts, couldn't POSSIBLY be
    replaced by a young, over-achieving but mere 1st year teacher?

    No, never mind. I'm sure it's all legal and arithmetically correct.
    Hey, 14%; 9% - it's all the same eh? Just one of those "minor
    nit-picky" discrepancies that happen in these complicated district
    documents.

    Ever spiraling,

    Schwaller

    =======================================================
    List services made available by First Step Internet, 
    serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994. 
    http://www.fsr.net 
    mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
    =======================================================





------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Pinpoint customers who are looking for what you sell. 


------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  =======================================================
   List services made available by First Step Internet, 
   serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.   
                 http://www.fsr.net                       
            mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
  =======================================================


------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  No virus found in this incoming message.
  Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
  Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.8.3/824 - Release Date: 5/29/2007 1:01 PM
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20070530/a78bb279/attachment.html