Browsing this Thread:
2 Anonymous Users
|
Re: equitable funding for Jersey City Charter Schools
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
 
|
Charter schools hire child study teams on as needed basis, as each school is considered its own district. The full time staff are as noted above, as are the building costs.
Posted on: 2011/1/17 18:18
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: equitable funding for Jersey City Charter Schools
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Run for the Board of Ed in the next election!
Posted on: 2011/1/17 16:13
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: equitable funding for Jersey City Charter Schools
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Just can't stay away
 
|
To be honest, it's people like me who are the problem. Those of us who are just starting to pay attention now, in a time of crisis. Had more people (including myself) been paying attention all along, maybe we wouldn't be in the dire straits we find ourselves in now.
Better late than never, but it does feel like trying to close the barn door after the cows already left (whatever that saying is).
Posted on: 2011/1/17 13:50
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: equitable funding for Jersey City Charter Schools
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Just can't stay away
|
Child study teams are directly related to special education services. That's part of what I found out in that conversation with the parent. The child study team are the people who do testing and placement for special education kids. They are also the people who often have contact with the parent to explain the program that their child is in and monitor how well the child is doing. The team is comprized of a few members, including a psychologist who does testing, a learning consultant, and (I think) a social worker. One of those people will provide case management services for the child and family.
And as far as being lame, I do agree that the PDF linked is somewhat vague because there are no specific breakdowns nor much in the way of explanations, but that's why the very first line of that post says it's at least a starting point. I didn't write it, so if your comment was an attempt to tweak me, you missed the bullseye. I'm just the one putting it out there. Lame or not, at least it's some information, and some information is better than no information. It seems to have raised a few new questions in your mind, so apparently it does have some value. If that information leads to more questions, that's a good thing. We should all question things more. We should all be questioning where our money goes. We earn it and pump it into the system - in vast quantities. To sit back and let the powers that be make it disappear at their whim is self destructive. It's good to question JCBOE. It's good to question charter schools. It's good to question anyone who has control over your hard earned money.
Posted on: 2011/1/17 13:06
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: equitable funding for Jersey City Charter Schools
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
The problem discussing this is that "special ed" can mean a kid has a session with a speech therapist a few time a week, or it can mean a full time attendant plus teachers and other services. The charters indeed do not have the facilities for the severe cases that must be taken by the District. So a simple expense line for "special ed" doesn't answer the question. There was a NYTimes article about this in June describing the publicly funded "education" of a blind and profoundly developmental delayed man of 20. It said the average cost of the students far less handicapped than him was $58,877. "There are 132,000 such students in the United States, out of more than 6.5 million now receiving some kind of special education service at an estimated cost of $74 billion a year." http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/20/edu ... an.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1 Interestingly, if you take the numbers from the lame PDF Red linked, in 08 they spent about $12m in special ed & other svcs like speech & PT, for a listed 3800 special ed students. that's about $3000 per. Chicken feed in a $600m budget and not nearly enough to skew major cash from the charters. Another set of numbers I found interesting was "instruction" was about half the expense as "plant maintenance & operations". Can it really be true that instruction at $28m is less than 5% of the total budget, yet the teachers are the one being asked to sacrifice? And what are the "child study teams" they spent $13m on? With that doc as evidence, I stand by my statement that they make this stuff as opaque as possible to the layman. Ex: does anyone know what the SBB is that gets half the budget? "General Fund Contribution to SBB 271,635,368"
Posted on: 2011/1/17 4:50
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: equitable funding for Jersey City Charter Schools
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
I can't speak for all charters but LCCS has special ed., occupational therapists, reading specialists, and speech therapists....all full-time. All charter schools have to provide services to children with IEPs. All district schools have a building.
Posted on: 2011/1/17 0:22
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: equitable funding for Jersey City Charter Schools
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Just can't stay away
|
Just re-read what I wrote. I thik it might be worded a little poorly.
I AM NOT trying to say that charter schools don't deserve more funding. They probably do. All I'm saying is that I think there should be an accurate comparison of costs based on the services provided by both types of schools. I am not questioning the PEOPLE involved, not the kids, nor their parents, but I do want to compare the numbers accurately. I want to look at numbers for services provided and compare them, that's all.
Posted on: 2011/1/16 23:14
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: equitable funding for Jersey City Charter Schools
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Just can't stay away
|
Here is a starting point for actual information. It was (I think) the second result down on a Google search using the search terms "JCBOE budget." LOL So much for secrecy.
http://www.jcboe.org/media/120428/userfr%20budget.pdf On page 2, about half way down on that document it says that over 37 million dollars in funds were transferreed to charter schools this year. If charter schools are serving 3,600 students, as reported in the article linked to in the post above, that's over 10K per student. NOW... having just looked this up and all, I've still got a lot of digesting that I want to do. I'm not trying to jump to any conclusions either way, however, I still have a problem with the 17K+ per student number. Yes, it's even listed in that document as the comparitive cost per student, however, at first blush, it does appear to me that that number is an average for all students, including special education. I had a very interesting conversation with someone who has a child in the special education program in JC public. The cost of educating a special education student is way, way way higher than it is for a general education student. Higher than I even thought about before. To summarize the conversation will have to be another post because it will be long. But as far as I can tell so far, I don't think it's fair to take an average for all public school students and compare it to the cost for charter school kids who would generally require much less intensive services.
Posted on: 2011/1/16 23:06
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: equitable funding for Jersey City Charter Schools
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
$10k for all would be equitable, and anyone with more than 2 or 3 kids would have to pony up the difference.
Posted on: 2011/1/16 18:35
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: equitable funding for Jersey City Charter Schools
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Posted on: 2011/1/16 17:16
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: equitable funding for Jersey City Charter Schools
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
I wanted to be brief and used the Abbot Districts as an example. I saw the Board of Ed budget increased in the early 1990's from $180 million to over $600 milion today. Basically, it was the Abbot Districts that started charter schools. As I said before, Doria said Bayonne can't afford to share their funding with charter schools. Since the money wasn't local not one care. However, JC is losing funding since 2005, the rate increased from $13.18 to $16.58. That is a significant increase.
Posted on: 2011/1/15 23:11
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: equitable funding for Jersey City Charter Schools
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Charter public schools do not get Abbott funding.
Posted on: 2011/1/15 22:07
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: equitable funding for Jersey City Charter Schools
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
The State of NJ has the third highest deficits for fiscal year 2011 compare the the other states. If the governor decides to give more money to charter schools most likely he will transfer money from the local school district. I wrote a letter to the editor back in the 1990's on the charter schools debate. I said Charter Schools will probably closed private/religious schools which received no funding. Incidently, former Mayor Doria, who chaired charter schools in Trenton said Bayonne cannot afford to have charter schools and at this point they do not. Under the Abbot funding, charter school advocates saw state tax dollars flow into JC and other urban districts. Now that the spigot is turned off, local taxes wil increase. There is no other answer.
Posted on: 2011/1/15 21:43
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: equitable funding for Jersey City Charter Schools
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
The new PS 3 and MS 4 were not built from funding deducted from the $17K per student. There was a whole school building corp funded by taxpayers to build schools. Maintenance, utilities and operation, yes, of course, but not mortgage. Charters pay mortgage and/or rent, in addition to maintenance, utilities, and operation, from the $9K per student operating budget.
Posted on: 2011/1/15 13:22
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: equitable funding for Jersey City Charter Schools
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Fair enough. But as I said in another subject, in this the 2nd decade of the millennium where information wants to be free, if you can't find the data it's because they don't want you to. It can't be rocket science to come up with a rough number of what is spent on special ed, subtract it from the total budget and divide by # of students. It might not be perfect but it would be a starting point. But no one is offering the public numbers. Just smoke and mirrors. As for the building issue, both district and Charters have to maintain their facilities, but only the charters have to be paying rent or mortgage out of their operating budgets. As I understand it, public school construction is a totally different budget. Perhaps someone more knowledgeable on that subject can comment.
Posted on: 2011/1/15 2:25
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: equitable funding for Jersey City Charter Schools
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2005/6/8 3:24 Last Login : 2022/11/28 0:04 From New Urbanist Area
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
1429
 |
Quote:
I believe the district budget, including what is factored into "per pupil" includes money that the district has to spend on maintaining and operating buildings and facilities.
Posted on: 2011/1/15 1:26
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: equitable funding for Jersey City Charter Schools
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
And until the district schools provide their own buildings ......
Even if charter schools received the exact same funding, they would still not be in equal footing.
Posted on: 2011/1/15 1:12
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: equitable funding for Jersey City Charter Schools
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Just can't stay away
|
My math? I don't have any math. I'm still trying to figure out which numbers to look at. I don't have any solutions. The fact that ANY kids, whether charter or traditional should go without is the problem. We collectively put enough money into the system that all our kids ought to be well taken care of, no matter where they go to school.
Posted on: 2011/1/15 1:01
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: equitable funding for Jersey City Charter Schools
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Just can't stay away
|
90% of what? That's what I'm trying to understand. I do think that all schools ought to be fully funded, but what, exactly is full funding? We need an answer to that question.
If charters are not providing the same services, you can't expect to be funded for the same services. Is it 90% of the general education student budget? I really don't know. Can anyone pinpoint what that number is? Maybe it's not fair to expect an answer here. It seems that this question has been under debate for years already. Maybe it's not meant to be solved in a casual manner, with a few posts in a community message board. Maybe I can try to look it up. The budgets ought to be public record somewhere. The whole thing really does seem to be very fuzzy. It's not meant to be frustrating. I'm really trying to understand. edited to add - You edited your last post, so this looks out of place in response, but I'll leave it anyhow. I'm not trying to argue, just trying to understand.
Posted on: 2011/1/15 0:48
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: equitable funding for Jersey City Charter Schools
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Can you tell me how you factor the cost of a school building, with all the school building codes and requirements that entails, into your math?
Posted on: 2011/1/15 0:34
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: equitable funding for Jersey City Charter Schools
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Just can't stay away
|
I'm not making any value judgments, nor am I trying to take sides. I'm just trying to understand exactly what's going on. In the process of trying to come to that understanding, I've found a few arguments, both ways, that seem to oversimplify things. It's not a matter of doing the same thing for less money while doing a better job of it. It's apples and oranges, yet it seems to be the "cost per pupil" statement that is the rallying cry for the charter school supporters. I think that people are just taking the public school budget and dividing it by the number of students, while doing the same for the charter schools. It's more complicated than that. Traditional public schools and charter schools both have obstacles to overcome, but it seems to me that the traditionals have to address a more varied student population.
I would never say that one child deserves anything more or anything less than any other child. I wish all children could have everything they need to become independent and successful in life. I am absolutely not saying that these children over here deserve this much, while those over there deserve that much. I am not attacking charter schools, public schools, or ANY of the children. I am only trying to say that I think I'm coming to the conclusion that the arguments might be used conveniently to make one side or the other look better. You can make numbers say anything you want by factoring some things in or some things out. I guess the question would be, 90% of what? I think that where some of the sticking point is.
Posted on: 2011/1/15 0:04
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: equitable funding for Jersey City Charter Schools
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
I don't know how many charters offer separate classrooms. Most mainstream the kids with IEP with separate tutoring and classes as needed. This is rather circular reasong, isn't it? Charters don't get the proper funding yet you're saying they don't offer the same services so they don't deserve the funding? The law says 90%, without a building.
Posted on: 2011/1/14 23:41
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: City Council tonight - equitable funding for Jersey City Charter Schools
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2005/6/8 3:24 Last Login : 2022/11/28 0:04 From New Urbanist Area
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
1429
|
Quote:
I am not necessarily disagreeing with the above, but I am just pointing out that, to the extent the formula is "corrected" to give an actual 90%, that this money will come from the district and will result in loss of resources for the students that are in district schools. You can say that that is necessary because 90% should be 90% as a matter of fairness. Or you can say that large urban school districts in New Jersey are corrupt, profligate institutions that waste the money they have and, if competently run, wouldn't miss the money they lose. I am in at least partial agreement. But the bottom line is that the demand for "the real 90%" is a demand to transfer funds from the district schools to the charters, and its proponents should acknowledge it as such. Your formulation that the district "shouldn't have been getting" the money is what begs the question. As far as I can see, no one is saying that the law is not being followed. What they are saying is that "90%" is a misnomer because there are several adjustments being made that reduce the percentage received. And as some people noted, there may be reasons why 90% is reduced in the end. For example, under Abbott, districts must provide pre-K services, and some of the state funding is devoted to that, either for the district schools or the contracted Abbot programs (I am unaware of any charter school pre-K's or if they are even permitted). I do not know precisely how this funding is factored into the overall "per pupil" average that is bandied about, but depending on how it is accounted for I can understand that there would be reasons for not factoring such aid and funding into the overall "90%" ratio. But the above is admittedly speculation on my part, because no one has ever explained the formula other than to say "It's complicated." From the numbers I've seen, I tend to believe that the charters need more money, and if it has to come from the districts than that's where it has to come from. On other other hand, there may be legitimate reasons why the 90% figure is reduced after adjustments, at least with respect to some of that adjustment.
Posted on: 2011/1/14 23:35
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: equitable funding for Jersey City Charter Schools
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Just can't stay away
|
From what I've been able to learn in the last few days, I think that this is a major complicating factor in terms of the use of the "cost per pupil" statement:
Traditional public schools have to educate all students, including those with disabilities, English second language students, etc. In the case of children with severe disabilities, a usual classroom ratio is one teacher, one teacher assistant, and (maybe) a teacher aide. That's potentially three people drawing a salary in one classroom. And to complicate it even more, those classrooms may max out at 6 students. Traditional classrooms seem to be averaging somewhere between 20 to 25 students with one teacher. Although I'm sort of new to trying to understand this situation, as far as I've been able to tell so far, most charter schools are not offering special education classrooms. I could definitely be wrong on this, but that is what I know so far. So, in my eyes, right now, the use of the term "cost per pupil" could be a somewhat misleading term. I'm getting the feeling that the numbers are skewed a bit. What would the cost per student be for the charter schools be if they had to do the same things that the public schools have to? Do I think that there is fat that can be cut from JCBOE? Yes, right now, I do. Do I think that JCBOE is run perfectly? No, I don't. However, I think I'm beginning to see the cost per pupil statement as a bit of a rallying cry to try to discredit the traditional public schools and laud the charters as doing a better job for much less. I just don't think it's such a black and white comparison as it's made out to be on the surface.
Posted on: 2011/1/14 22:43
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: City Council tonight - equitable funding for Jersey City Charter Schools
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Saying the districts will "lose money" that they shouldn't have been getting begs the question. Continuing an injustice because the beneficiaries might object is grotesque. And the hostility to charters by the education institutions like the unions and districts long predates the current administration in Trenton.
Posted on: 2011/1/14 18:56
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: City Council tonight - equitable funding for Jersey City Charter Schools
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2005/6/8 3:24 Last Login : 2022/11/28 0:04 From New Urbanist Area
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
1429
|
Quote:
If the formula is modified so that charter school students get more money per pupil, then district schools will get less money per pupil. This may very well be a result required by fairness or equity, but any school district that sees funds per pupil going down by changing the formula is going to object. Having seen what's going down in Trenton, it's not charter schools that have had war declared upon them.
Posted on: 2011/1/14 17:47
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: City Council tonight - equitable funding for Jersey City Charter Schools
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
It won't hurt the district as much as if the kids were back in it. Then they'd have to educate them. I simply fail to understand how anybody can say it hurts the district to give 90% of what the people of NJ have allocated to educate children to the PUBLIC SCHOOL that IS educating them. No one is "taking money away" from schools that "should" have it. They don't have the students so they have no business getting the money. We're not talking about vouchers for private schools, these are PUBLIC schools! The war on Charters boggles my mind. I certainly don't think the school system should be replaced by charters, but they should be treated as laboratories for change, with students who volunteer to be guinea pigs. Instead of throttling them in a fit of institutional paranoid psychosis, the district should have a full time team at LCCS studying how it outperforms every other k-8 in town on half the money with students that are only filtered by bothering to apply. And then they should implement their methods citywide.
Posted on: 2011/1/14 4:43
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: City Council tonight - equitable funding for Jersey City Charter Schools
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2005/6/8 3:24 Last Login : 2022/11/28 0:04 From New Urbanist Area
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
1429
|
Quote:
It's amazing that, it the several years that this issue has been around, that it has not been coherently explained. As I understand it, the 90% figure is some initial calculation by the school district. But the amount urban school districts spend per pupil is then adjusted (increased) by numerous factors, pursuant to the Abbot decision and state law in response to it. The charter school funding, however, is not affected by such adjustment. Most recently, I heard it also had something to do with the numerous tax abated properties in JC. To date, I still don't get it. I attribute this to a) my own lack of comprehension and b) the complexity of the school funding formula, over any failure by the charter school proponents. I suspect between Shelly Skinner, Steve Fulop, and some brainy dude hidden away deep in the caverns of some secret laboratory, a coherent explanation could be put together. In the meantime, I suspect many parents of charter school proponents don't really care about the details, because they know that they are getting shorted on funding some way or another. The other thing to remember is that, changing the formula is something of a zero sum game. The money reallocated to charter schools gets taken from the district schools. That may be necessary as a matter of equity, but it is going to hurt the district.
Posted on: 2011/1/14 3:06
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: City Council tonight - equitable funding for Jersey City Charter Schools
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2004/2/6 23:13 Last Login : 2021/7/30 1:08 From Jersey City
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
1225
|
the seemingly unanswered question is - what in the state school funding formula is resulting in the funding shortfall?
what specifically is the problem preventing equitable funding? what needs to be fixed? (aside from the 90% and non-funding of facilities)
Posted on: 2011/1/13 15:33
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: City Council tonight - equitable funding for Jersey City Charter Schools
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Charter school supporters descended on the Jersey City City Council tonight to blast what they called the ?inequitable? financial support provided to the city?s charter schools.
Shelley Skinner, director of development for Learning Community Charter School, said New Jersey?s charter schools ?do not get anywhere near? the amount of funding they should. State law requires charter schools receive 90 percent of the programming funds spent by the home district, but no charter school in the state receives that much, according to Skinner. Jersey City?s 3,600 charter-school students are the ?worst funded students in the state of New Jersey right now, by a landslide, too,? Skinner said. Jersey City?s traditional public schools spend about $17,000 per student, while its charter schools spend around half that or less, she added. If charter schools don?t get the appropriate funding soon, then this issue could end up in court, Skinner said. Quinn Williamson, a 13-year old student of Learning Community Charter School, told the council that he and his family hold fundraisers each Halloween to raise money for the school. Charter schools need more funding, Williamson said. ?Every child has a right to an equal education,? he said. The council voted unanimously 8-0 to pass a ceremonial resolution urging Gov. Chris Christie and the state Legislature to ?approve an equitable funding formula for charter schools.? Councilwoman Willie Flood was absent. Councilman Steven Fulop, a former board member at Learning Community Charter School, said in his comments before voting that Jersey City?s tax-abatement policy is to blame for much of the funding inequity between traditional public schools and charter schools. The city gives tax abatements ?to anybody who can walk and chew gum at the same time,? Fulop said. This makes the city?s rateable base seems smaller than it actually is, he said. ?It?s not fair to the kids,? Fulop said.
Posted on: 2011/1/13 1:45
|
|||
|
||||