(02-21-2011 09:32 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  I never agree with giving an all encompassing test and placing students on tracks Japan style.

The educational systems at the top of the world rankings all do it.

Finland has climbed to #1, and the interesting thing about what they do is that the C track is a vocational education track, and they have a pretty amazing vocational ed system, all the way through at least the equivalent of associates degrees from technical colleges.

If we want to improve education, we need to look at worldwide best practices. Just like health care--where Obamacare completely ignores the lessons of the last 60 years to emulate outmoded and ineffective systems.

(02-21-2011 08:58 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I think there ought to be standards laid on the school district. Spend at least 90% of your budget in the classroom, no more than 10% on admin. That's a hypothetical percentage, someone more knowledgeable than I am could provide a better idea just what the breakdown should be.

Just saying, that school districts have many, if not the same, administrative concerns that a business has. You need an HR department, a Payroll team, Maintenance, Logistics, IT, Trainers, Secretaries, Health, Lunchroom etc.

How would you manage those needs with just 10% (hypothetically) of the budget?

I think as well, highlighted by the Wisconsin debacle and the bloated beast that is the Madison and the Milwaukee SD, is that there are a ton of smaller school districts without Asst. Principals, and Curriculum Developers, and the IT guy is moonlights at Best Buy selling Windows 7 laptops the next town over.

Personally, I do believe there is major admin bloat at many school districts. No way to argue against that - just not sure right now what is the answer to burgeoning costs.

(02-22-2011 12:49 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(02-21-2011 09:32 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  I never agree with giving an all encompassing test and placing students on tracks Japan style.

The educational systems at the top of the world rankings all do it.

Finland has climbed to #1, and the interesting thing about what they do is that the C track is a vocational education track, and they have a pretty amazing vocational ed system, all the way through at least the equivalent of associates degrees from technical colleges.

If we want to improve education, we need to look at worldwide best practices. Just like health care--where Obamacare completely ignores the lessons of the last 60 years to emulate outmoded and ineffective systems.

It certainly is a system we could implement with some tweaks. I would not be against that at all.

(02-22-2011 09:26 AM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  

(02-21-2011 08:58 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I think there ought to be standards laid on the school district. Spend at least 90% of your budget in the classroom, no more than 10% on admin. That's a hypothetical percentage, someone more knowledgeable than I am could provide a better idea just what the breakdown should be.

Just saying, that school districts have many, if not the same, administrative concerns that a business has. You need an HR department, a Payroll team, Maintenance, Logistics, IT, Trainers, Secretaries, Health, Lunchroom etc.

How would you manage those needs with just 10% (hypothetically) of the budget?

I think as well, highlighted by the Wisconsin debacle and the bloated beast that is the Madison and the Milwaukee SD, is that there are a ton of smaller school districts without Asst. Principals, and Curriculum Developers, and the IT guy is moonlights at Best Buy selling Windows 7 laptops the next town over.

Personally, I do believe there is major admin bloat at many school districts. No way to argue against that - just not sure right now what is the answer to burgeoning costs.

Goes back to my argument of local control. If we decide that each student "costs" $7500, then the district budget is based on simple numbers. Of course, some districts will correctly argue that things are more expensive in their district than others... and there can be adjustments... give each district whatever they "deserve", and they will prioritize as they see fit. If that means dropping an assistant superintendent so they can have a 15:1 teacher ratio, or going to 25:1 so they can keep it, then so be it.

(02-22-2011 09:26 AM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  

(02-21-2011 08:58 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I think there ought to be standards laid on the school district. Spend at least 90% of your budget in the classroom, no more than 10% on admin. That's a hypothetical percentage, someone more knowledgeable than I am could provide a better idea just what the breakdown should be.

Just saying, that school districts have many, if not the same, administrative concerns that a business has. You need an HR department, a Payroll team, Maintenance, Logistics, IT, Trainers, Secretaries, Health, Lunchroom etc.
How would you manage those needs with just 10% (hypothetically) of the budget?
I think as well, highlighted by the Wisconsin debacle and the bloated beast that is the Madison and the Milwaukee SD, is that there are a ton of smaller school districts without Asst. Principals, and Curriculum Developers, and the IT guy is moonlights at Best Buy selling Windows 7 laptops the next town over.
Personally, I do believe there is major admin bloat at many school districts. No way to argue against that - just not sure right now what is the answer to burgeoning costs.

For the reasons you indicate, I'm not sure whether 10% is the right number. But I am sure that SOME number is the right number, and that number can be determined reasonably. I'm also certain that whateveer the realisitic number is, most school districts are way, way out of liine with excessive non-productive expenditures. So is almost any other government agnecy as well.

(02-22-2011 02:21 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(02-22-2011 09:26 AM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  

(02-21-2011 08:58 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I think there ought to be standards laid on the school district. Spend at least 90% of your budget in the classroom, no more than 10% on admin. That's a hypothetical percentage, someone more knowledgeable than I am could provide a better idea just what the breakdown should be.

Just saying, that school districts have many, if not the same, administrative concerns that a business has. You need an HR department, a Payroll team, Maintenance, Logistics, IT, Trainers, Secretaries, Health, Lunchroom etc.
How would you manage those needs with just 10% (hypothetically) of the budget?
I think as well, highlighted by the Wisconsin debacle and the bloated beast that is the Madison and the Milwaukee SD, is that there are a ton of smaller school districts without Asst. Principals, and Curriculum Developers, and the IT guy is moonlights at Best Buy selling Windows 7 laptops the next town over.
Personally, I do believe there is major admin bloat at many school districts. No way to argue against that - just not sure right now what is the answer to burgeoning costs.

For the reasons you indicate, I'm not sure whether 10% is the right number. But I am sure that SOME number is the right number, and that number can be determined reasonably. I'm also certain that whateveer the realisitic number is, most school districts are way, way out of liine with excessive non-productive expenditures. So is almost any other government agnecy as well.

My mom is a principle here in NC, in a poor-ish rural town. She said that on the form that they send to the state has 37% side costs which are classified as Other Administrative tasks. As for the entire Vance County School System, I would say that the two middle and three high schools cost a little more to manage because they each have over 1,200 students.

I would like to take this opportunity to speak of some of the waste the feds send to the schools. Just last year they gave a few poorer counties grants to buy laptops for students. They gave Wake, Durham, and Orange counties (Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill) grants to give qualifying students iPads.

(02-22-2011 12:49 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(02-21-2011 09:32 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  I never agree with giving an all encompassing test and placing students on tracks Japan style.

The educational systems at the top of the world rankings all do it.

Finland has climbed to #1, and the interesting thing about what they do is that the C track is a vocational education track, and they have a pretty amazing vocational ed system, all the way through at least the equivalent of associates degrees from technical colleges.

If we want to improve education, we need to look at worldwide best practices. Just like health care--where Obamacare completely ignores the lessons of the last 60 years to emulate outmoded and ineffective systems.

I am for willful tracks that offer the opportunity to place out of every semester. I still think that every state should manage their own education, instead of a national test.

I've said once or twice before that I also agree with establishing a vocational track. This is where every state managing their own educations comes in because states can taylor their courses to cater to growing industries in that area. I would also like to see the opportunity to gain certification in a field while in high school.