[Vision2020] Why I'm going to vote Yes on the Levy
Sue Hovey
suehovey at moscow.com
Sun Nov 11 22:52:10 PST 2007
Matt, I haven't read my email since I wrote you that late night ramble below a couple of nights ago, and I don't want to force you into that again, so let me give you just one instance of a program very dear to my heart which is now gone and won't be restored unless the levy passes.
It's in the junior high and was instituted just about the time you graduated from high school. We were thinking of ways to make the transition from elementary school to the junior high less stressful for young students and one thing we came up with was teaming. Each 7th grader was assigned to a team and each team had core teachers who had a second common preparation period to work together on individual student needs. It may not appear to be a costly item, but that's about 8 teachers who could have been working with 25 more students in a class, so it isn't cheap. But it paid big dividends when it came to identifying students who were beginning to have problems and for whom teachers could develop a plan involving all of them and implement it to give those students a bit more help early on. Also, they now had a chance to work together on integrating curriculum--one example a geology dig where they integrated math and history. You may remember it from the big feature story highlighted in the Daily News.
I was in charge of the Acceleration program, which had very low enrollment each hour (7 or 8 students who had been identified as at-risk but not eligible for special education services) and I also met with those team teachers frequently and a substitute teacher would be hired for my class period when I did. That, too, wasn't cheap. This process worked so well for 7th grade students that the district allocated money to institute 8th grade teaming, too.
One program that was cut as a result of the suit was the 8th grade teaming. The reason: Cutting it meant those teachers would again be assigned to a full class schedule and with 8 retirements from the junior high they could be moved in to some of those positions and a full contingent of replacement teachers would not have to be hired. Cutting the program probably meant the district could hire one fewer teacher for the junior high, and further cutting of the program for gifted students saved part of another position.
I was talking with one of the special education teachers a couple of weeks ago and she was lamenting that there was no meeting time for her to go to the teachers of an individual 8th grader and work on planning for her/his lessons on a daily basis. It comes down to catch as catch can... If the levy passes, that program will be reinstated. If it doesn't, I would imagine 7th grade teaming will be cut next year.
And I've rambled on again and didn't even touch on the issue of teacher retention and why there aren't jobs for new teachers in Moscow. Lots of people would like to teach here. It has the reputation of being a district where teachers can be creative and work with others who are of like mind. Those big pay raises in Washington were only instituted beginning this year. I have no doubt they will have a future impact on our teacher retention.
If your friends were applying last year, all new hiring was frozen because of the lawsuit.
I do appreciate your diligence in wanting to have good reasons to vote yes. I hope I have given you a good reason.
Sue H.
----- Original Message -----
From: Matt Decker
To: Sue Hovey ; Bev Bafus ; keely emerinemix ; Paul Rumelhart ; Vision2020
Sent: Saturday, November 10, 2007 4:00 PM
Subject: RE: [Vision2020] Why I'm going to vote Yes on the Levy
Sue,
Thanks for the reply. I understand I am a little late in the debate, but better late then never. I was wondering, do you happen to know exactly what programs this increase will save? Where the money is being spent on exactly. This issue hangs heavily in my vote. I surely understand how we need to pay our teachers, but don't understand if so many teachers are leaving why hasn't that been the front running ideal behind the levy. Why also, do I have four friends with teaching degrees but had to find employment elsewhere(being UI grads) because there were no spots open. One of those being a special ed major. I am not doubting you but don't understand why an issue as important as teacher retention has not been brought up to the manner it should.
I have no problem giving my vote for the levy. I have two children that are attending/will St. Maries school. This will not sway my vote. I believe all children need a fair shot at life, through a properly educated criteria. If you have the time, help me understand how and where the money is going, and how the increase will make our schools better. Thank you.
Matt
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: suehovey at moscow.com
To: bevbafus at verizon.net; mattd2107 at hotmail.com; kjajmix1 at msn.com; godshatter at yahoo.com; vision2020 at moscow.com
Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2007 02:37:08 -0800
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Why I'm going to vote Yes on the Levy
And I'll add just a bit. When you were there in some of your classes you had 25 students--rarely did you have more than that. However, remember those students in special education--they were often in classes of 3 or 4 because they were required by law to be in the least restrictive environment and for some of them, that meant really, really small classes. That is still the case except that a larger percentage of our school population is in special education than when you were in school. And that's because parents move to Moscow so their children can have those programs. You say you are all for smaller classes as long as the GPA rises. The GPA scores of Moscow school students are among the highest in the state and compare favorably with Pullman already. I don't know what more you can expect.
You compare Moscow and Pullman. Let me give you another figure. Since I retired from the high school I have been working with teachers in both Moscow and Pullman on a National Certification Program that is pretty costly for the teachers, but is a very fine professional development piece. The teachers in both places are really exceptional. I continue to be so impressed with them. When the teachers in Idaho complete the program the State pays them $2000 a year for 5 years. When the teachers in Pullman complete the program (and it costs the same for both groups) they make $5,000 each year for ten to twenty years, and if they are teaching in a school where more than half the students are entitled to free and reduced lunch they make $10,000 each year for that same amount of time. Now the sad thing is that we are losing teachers to Pullman and Clarkston and who can blame them. We really need to keep them here, and spending money for enhanced salaries helps a bit. Even so, teachers who stay in Moscow aren't even close to earning what those in Pullman do.
Those who are comparing Moscow to Pullman test scores aren't even making a legitimate comparison. There is no way to compare the Moscow Test Scores with Pullman test scores because they are two separate tests, given at different times during the year. Please don't be taken in by that. Both groups of students do very well.
One of the letter writers was discussing the whole issue of vouchers. While that isn't a central issue in this case, just be aware issuing vouchers simply increases the cost of education because it works to the benefit of people who send their children to private and parochial schools. And while they have the liberty to make that choice, they continue to have an obligation to fund public education--just as do I and Norman even though our own children have graduated. Someone else paid for their education, now it's our opportunity to help fund the coming generations.
The state has put additional money into schools, but it is an offset, and it isn't a lot. It doesn't mean we will be getting more money--it will be coming from another pocket, but the law was not written to increase school funding--just to keep in on the same level it has been. And the scarey thing about that is there is no way to determine the state will continue to fund at the same level--and if it changes, it is likely to diminish. That's just the way of our legislature. While it makes good sense to have the state completely fund schools because it makes educational opportunity more equal for kids wherever they live, that will never happen.
One other item of which you may not be aware: When you were in school, part of your schooling needs were paid for by the same permanent levy that now serves this generation of children. Occasionally it has had to be increased as inflation grew--the cost of gas for bussing, is only one example. Those who are writing against the levy have conveniently omitted that important detail. I think if you look carefully at the budget you will conclude that Moscow does spend its money wisely. And the budget process is open to all the citizens--budget hearings will begin soon for next year. The meeting times are published and the agenda posted. You, as a voter, are welcome to attend, but try to do it before the fact, then you will have the information you need before you vote. It's a bit late for all the scoffers to say they want assurance the money will be used wisely--they had that information early on.
And it's off to bed. Come join us in the morning at Friendship Square as we rally for this School District. Isn't it only fair that the kids who go here today are entitled to a quality education, just as you were? Vote yes, please, on November 13.
If you do not believe money has an important impact on education, ask yourself why the wealthy send their children to expensive private schools.
Sue Hovey
----- Original Message -----
From: Bev Bafus
To: Matt Decker ; keely emerinemix ; Paul Rumelhart ; Vision2020
Sent: Friday, November 09, 2007 11:52 PM
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Why I'm going to vote Yes on the Levy
Thanks for your reasoned questions, Matt.
I'm not an expert on school financing, but I do know a bit.
In your math, the first thing you are forgetting is that Ms. Donicht said "salaries and BENEFITS".
Taking your formula where you came up with $40,000 as the median salary - Using your math, this would be the median expense per staff member. Usually 35% of that would be benefits, leaving the actual salary far lower. Many of these benefits are required by law, as they are with most businesses.
The second item I noticed is the comparison, yet again, of Moscow with Pullman. Until the State of Washington and the State of Idaho fund their schools with the same formula, you cannot compare these two towns.
Just my thoughts...
Bev
-----Original Message-----
From: vision2020-bounces at moscow.com [mailto:vision2020-bounces at moscow.com]On Behalf Of Matt Decker
Sent: Friday, November 09, 2007 11:26 PM
To: keely emerinemix; Paul Rumelhart; Vision2020
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Why I'm going to vote Yes on the Levy
Keely/all,
First and foremost thanks for your drive and determination towards our children's education. You've taken many steps to insure success. I have to admit though, that I am unsure about giving my vote to the levy. Let me explain. I have many questions and have heard from both sides on this topic. So please let me give my thoughts, but also give me hope that our schools will spend the money wisely.
Candis Donicht wrote an opinion piece tonight in which she states that MSD has a budget of $20,360,923. She also mentions that 81% of that goes to "salaries and benefits". She further states that, "175 teachers" are employed by MSD. Now bare with me, since I am a MSD graduate. Twenty mil divided by 175=$114,285. We all know that can't be true. So I will assume that this budget includes cooks, assistants, lawn care, etc. Let's again assume that 500 people are employed by the MSD, under this percentage. Twenty mil divided by 500=$40,000. A great median wage. Now we are going to increase this rate by 1.9 mil. A increase of 10.33%. Seems pretty high to me. Where is this money going?
Now I know I may not have all the numbers correct, but I also doubt that they are too far off. To me Candice stating that 81% of the money goes to pay scares me. Why should raising the rate of teachers pay three times more then that of inflation, raise our level of education? Money does not = education.
Furthermore, Dale( I will be labeled as a kirker for mentioning his name) Courtney brought up a valid point in his opinion piece. He mentioned that the state tax has been raised by 1%, all of which is for schools. Hopefully meaning that more is coming this way. Why not wait another year?
I also can't get over the fact that our neighboring cities pay less, but have higher test scores. Pullman has less teachers, but yet again beat us in most accounts. Again money does not = education
Also cant understand how Moscow has lost student numbers, but yet we insist on smaller numbers. Why? When I was there we had 25-30 students per class(1984-95). Now we want smaller? Hey I'm all for it, but only if the GPA rises. Which, I am unsure of.
I have no problem giving my vote to this levy, but I need question like these answered. Please give me hope.
Thanks for your time
Matt
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: kjajmix1 at msn.com
To: godshatter at yahoo.com; vision2020 at moscow.com
Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2007 21:30:17 -0800
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Why I'm going to vote Yes on the Levy
Thank you, Paul!
keely
> Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2007 20:59:25 -0800
> From: godshatter at yahoo.com
> To: vision2020 at moscow.com
> Subject: [Vision2020] Why I'm going to vote Yes on the Levy
>
> Just a few reasons:
>
> I can't underestimate the value of education in our community. Forget
> evolution vs. intelligent design, think basic math skills, a sense of
> history, simple reading skills, a knowledge of the language we speak,
> and a basic understanding of science. Where would we be today if we
> didn't value education? Do you like that computer you're reading this
> with? Are you happy to know that the hospital is just down the street
> if you have some kind of medical problem? Would you rather drive to the
> ocean, or walk? The more data we have to live life, the better it will
> become. The more we all know, the better off we all are. This
> prosperity results in real-world economic development. This makes us
> richer as a community. Our poorest people are richer than much of the
> rest of the world.
>
> So, education is important. But why not educate everyone individually?
> Why centralize it?
>
> Well, first you have economies of scale. There is more to learning than
> just sitting around the teacher on the floor in a semi-circle, listening
> to him or her reading you stories. You need books and supplies. You
> need places to work, and you need prepared lessons. Centralizing all
> this makes sense. Why expect every family to buy a microscope? Or a
> bunsen burner? Or a wall map of the US? Why dump a substantial amount
> of money individually when we can spend less by centralizing it?
>
> You also have the benefits of specialization. We teach our teachers
> about one particular subject until they become experts on it. Why ask
> everyone to learn everything about all subjects? We also teach our
> teachers how to teach. It's not simple, and just faking your way
> through it is not recommended. Why expect all of us to learn this?
> Granted, it's probably very useful, but we have a limited amount of time
> and a limited number of neurons. Learning all this takes time, and the
> ones who have learned it the best cost money. Yet we need them desperately.
>
> Public education is the great equalizer. People who can't afford to
> teach their children, whether it's because of finances or time
> commitments or lack of knowledge in some areas, will still be able to
> give them an education. Every child, no matter their background, has
> the opportunity to excel in their learning. Who will become the next
> great physicist, or mathematician, or musician? It's also a great
> springboard. Who will be in the right place with the right set of facts
> and the knowledge to make use of them and do the next great thing?
> That's why I want to live forever. So I can see what people keep coming
> up with as the world progresses.
>
> Another reason for centralization is the changing nature of the world we
> live in. All of us spend much of our lifetime unlearning things we
> learned as children. Some of it was simply our misunderstandings as we
> developed and are simply later correcting. Other facts, though, have
> simply been shown to be wrong. Look how much physics has changed in the
> last 50 years. Subjects like history change as we realize more about
> our past. Geography changes as world events progress. Even with
> relatively slowly changing fields, such as mathematics, new ways of
> imparting knowledge to others in these areas are found. Teaching
> incorrect knowledge is probably worse than not teaching that knowledge
> at all. This corrected knowledge needs to be assimilated, and it's
> inefficient to have to teach every homemaker just to have them teach
> their kids the next day. It's more efficient to have those specialists
> I mentioned previously get updated on their subjects. It's faster,
> because they are subject experts, and there are fewer of them to teach.
> It's also easier to require that they get updated on their subjects.
>
> So why support this levy, specifically? Because, in my humblest of
> opinions, every penny we can afford to throw at it we will see back
> again a hundred-fold in the future as a community. I'm sure there's a
> line out there past which any increases will not help. I think we are
> so far away from the breakpoint that it's silly to talk about it. Also,
> the appropriateness of this levy has been put into question. Show our
> community that we know how important education is by voting Yes on this.
>
> Paul
>
> =======================================================
> 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
> =======================================================
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Windows Live Hotmail and Microsoft Office Outlook – together at last. Get it now!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Boo! Scare away worms, viruses and so much more! Try Windows Live OneCare! Try now!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
=======================================================
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
=======================================================
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peek-a-boo FREE Tricks & Treats for You! Get 'em!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20071111/157365dd/attachment-0001.html
More information about the Vision2020
mailing list