Last week, I wrote that I am “hoping to share them [my library] and knowledge with my progeny”. Interestingly enough, I ended up having one of those conversations with my third grade son just a couple of days after I wrote the column.
My son, being in the third grade, just had his first end of grade (EOG) tests. I certainly have no objection to having EOG tests. The concept is nothing new. I had plenty of tests when I was in school. The EOG is just one more comprehensive test that is administered. If a child paid attention in school all year long, taking an EOG test is nothing to be feared. The way I see it, testing measures achievement, both by the student and by the pedagogical staff.
That, however, is not the point of my rant today. What came out of the EOG testing that I found curious and led to a discussion about reality, economics, government, and life was the topic of breakfast. Our nine-year-old informed us that he wanted to eat breakfast at school on the days the tests were being administered. Not only was it encouraged by the teachers at the school that the students should have a good night’s rest, but also a decent breakfast in the morning. I am in agreement with both ideas. The interesting thing was that the school would be offering breakfast to all students, not just those who were “economically disadvantaged” on test days. I was informed that breakfast was “free”.
Personally, I understand the need to serve a cafeteria style lunch at large schools. At Selma Elementary School, 90% of students get either free or reduced price lunch. We don’t qualify for free or reduced pricing on lunch, nor would we accept it if we did. A full priced lunch is only $2. If you can’t afford $2 a day for lunch, you either need to rethink the priorities of your budget or you probably should not be having children. When I was in elementary school, I remember taking a metal lunch box with a simple peanut butter and jelly sandwich, some cheese puffs, and a bit of milk in a thermos. I was happy with that, and it was what my family could afford sometimes. We send our son with a home packed lunch every day, not out of necessity, but out of choice.
School lunch is heavily subsidized by the federal government. The average school lunch costs $2.66 to prepare, according to the research I just did (and those are outdated figures). Add to that the costs of running a cafeteria, staff, electricity, and water (and I am sure there are many other costs) and it is a significant amount of money. The federal government subsidized $2.47 for every free lunch (again, probably an outdated number). Ironically, full priced lunches are only subsidized $1.90, so schools get more federal funds for free or reduced lunches. Besides tying the amounts of free and reduced lunches to Title 1 federal funds, you can now see why schools push so hard for as many students to get on the free and reduced lunch programs at your local public schools. In 2011, the federal government spent $14.3 billion just on the school lunch program, not that the Constitution allows for such expenditures. Politicians, however, never let that stand in their way.
Obviously, free lunches are not free. Someone has to pay for them, and that is the US taxpayer. We pay for the school lunch program at the federal level, the state level, and the local level, so we are on the hook for the cost one way or another. If I pay full cost, we pay more at the local levels of government for lunch. If we get reduced or “free” cost lunch, we pay more at the federal level.
A gallon of milk costs approximately $3.50 right now. A box of Wal-Mart store brand cereal can be as cheap as $1, maybe $2 if you get a larger box of a more popular variety. I know, since I do my own shopping. A box of cereal will certainly last at least a week for one child. That means breakfast will cost as low as $4.50 per week. At less than $5 a week, I still cannot fathom the need for a regular school breakfast program in addition to a school lunch program. If you can’t afford $5 a week for your child to eat breakfast at home, you need to either rethink the priorities of your budget or you probably should not be reproducing.
I had the discussion with my nine-year-old that the breakfast was not actually free. Taxpayers are picking up the tab for his newly found breakfast. Regardless of how many times he insisted that the meal was free, I corrected him on that concept. I am paying for his breakfast one way or another, and I hope that he grasped the concept.
We all love our children, but there are no guarantees of equality of outcome in either one’s ability to provide meals or even in test scores. Children can still live on a simple, home provided meal, and be happy. To be honest, I wish that more parents took the personal responsibility to provide for their own children more seriously and the school cafeteria trash cans were overflowing with brown paper bags from home packed lunches and even breakfast items rather than letting the taxpayers pick up the cost.
Showing posts with label schools. Show all posts
Showing posts with label schools. Show all posts
Friday, June 01, 2012
Wednesday, April 21, 2010
Column for April 22, 2010
My lovely bride and I had the pleasure of being chaperons for our boy's first grade class field trip to the North Carolina Zoo in Asheboro last week. It was a beautiful day for such an excursion. Two days later I led a field trip of my own. I took my boy, nephew, future brother-in-law, and his son to the North Carolina Aquarium at Pine Knoll Shores and Fort Macon. Yes, I was feeling the burn on Saturday, too.
The zoo trip was free for our son because of a funding grant, but we had to pay $9 each for admission. Normally the entrance fee for adults is $10, but since we were part of a group, we got a whole dollar discount each. The aquarium entrance fee was $34 for all 5 of us. That amounted to about a dollar a minute. The aquarium is smaller than I am used to, but is still a nice little fish zoo. The land animal zoo in Asheboro, by contrast, is a lot larger and more expansive than I am used to.
Here is the rub in all of this. If had known how all of this worked in terms of finances, we could have bought a $50 family membership and gotten in as often as we want, at no extra charge at either attraction. I did not know this until we were already at the aquarium and I sighed at the cost of admission for us all. I was told that if I wanted to pay another $16, I could get a family membership. Since I have no idea if we will visit the zoo or another aquarium in the next year or not, I passed on it. I wish I could have applied my zoo admission to the aquarium admission for a membership, though.
So why am I annoyed other than that? I look at the zoo and aquarium the same way I do at toll roads. I am already paying for the existence of the road, zoo, or aquarium with my tax dollars. If I choose to use the very thing for which I am helping to pay, I am charged for it yet again. That amounts to double taxation. Granted, the second taxation is voluntary, but usage fees or admission charges are nothing more than a tax to enjoy the public facilities for which we already pay.
I realize that it is expensive to keep animals, maintain grounds, keep fish alive in gigantic tanks, etc. That is part and parcel of having a zoo or aquarium. Fort Macon, on the other hand, I am sure does not cost nearly as much to run, even though it is a state park, has a nice new building, and park rangers on staff. Admission to Fort Macon is free, and it is one of my favorite day trip destinations.
I joined the Friends of Fort Macon organization. There are similar such groups for libraries, zoos, aquariums, animal shelters, and the like. Their purpose is generally for preservation, fund raising, and enhancement efforts. I am fine with that concept. I love private organizations and donation efforts for the public benefit and for those who are enthusiastic about preservation and about being benefactors.
I do believe that a zoo, aquariums, historic sites, and state parks are definitely worth having and serve the public good. I would prefer, however, that they be free for all North Carolina taxpayers. At one time, I was able to go to the aquarium at Manteo without an admission charge. I wish that were the case still. I don't like paying for the same service twice, whether it is for a zoo, and aquarium, or public highway.
I feel that same way about public education, which is why I support school voucher programs. If you send your child to private school, you are taxed for public schools and have to pay tuition for a private school. How about services at your local county courthouse? How many services do we pay for twice? If you pay high gas taxes and income taxes like we do in North Carolina then have to pay a toll as is planned for sections of I-540 in Raleigh, people are paying twice for the same stretch of road.
Maybe if we did not spend money on all sorts of entitlement programs and cut out wasteful spending, we could actually afford to have public attractions that do not cost North Carolina residents twice.
The zoo trip was free for our son because of a funding grant, but we had to pay $9 each for admission. Normally the entrance fee for adults is $10, but since we were part of a group, we got a whole dollar discount each. The aquarium entrance fee was $34 for all 5 of us. That amounted to about a dollar a minute. The aquarium is smaller than I am used to, but is still a nice little fish zoo. The land animal zoo in Asheboro, by contrast, is a lot larger and more expansive than I am used to.
Here is the rub in all of this. If had known how all of this worked in terms of finances, we could have bought a $50 family membership and gotten in as often as we want, at no extra charge at either attraction. I did not know this until we were already at the aquarium and I sighed at the cost of admission for us all. I was told that if I wanted to pay another $16, I could get a family membership. Since I have no idea if we will visit the zoo or another aquarium in the next year or not, I passed on it. I wish I could have applied my zoo admission to the aquarium admission for a membership, though.
So why am I annoyed other than that? I look at the zoo and aquarium the same way I do at toll roads. I am already paying for the existence of the road, zoo, or aquarium with my tax dollars. If I choose to use the very thing for which I am helping to pay, I am charged for it yet again. That amounts to double taxation. Granted, the second taxation is voluntary, but usage fees or admission charges are nothing more than a tax to enjoy the public facilities for which we already pay.
I realize that it is expensive to keep animals, maintain grounds, keep fish alive in gigantic tanks, etc. That is part and parcel of having a zoo or aquarium. Fort Macon, on the other hand, I am sure does not cost nearly as much to run, even though it is a state park, has a nice new building, and park rangers on staff. Admission to Fort Macon is free, and it is one of my favorite day trip destinations.
I joined the Friends of Fort Macon organization. There are similar such groups for libraries, zoos, aquariums, animal shelters, and the like. Their purpose is generally for preservation, fund raising, and enhancement efforts. I am fine with that concept. I love private organizations and donation efforts for the public benefit and for those who are enthusiastic about preservation and about being benefactors.
I do believe that a zoo, aquariums, historic sites, and state parks are definitely worth having and serve the public good. I would prefer, however, that they be free for all North Carolina taxpayers. At one time, I was able to go to the aquarium at Manteo without an admission charge. I wish that were the case still. I don't like paying for the same service twice, whether it is for a zoo, and aquarium, or public highway.
I feel that same way about public education, which is why I support school voucher programs. If you send your child to private school, you are taxed for public schools and have to pay tuition for a private school. How about services at your local county courthouse? How many services do we pay for twice? If you pay high gas taxes and income taxes like we do in North Carolina then have to pay a toll as is planned for sections of I-540 in Raleigh, people are paying twice for the same stretch of road.
Maybe if we did not spend money on all sorts of entitlement programs and cut out wasteful spending, we could actually afford to have public attractions that do not cost North Carolina residents twice.
Thursday, April 01, 2010
Column for April 1, 2010
In every day life, I try to use good manners. I was taught to keep my elbows off the table at dinner, not to chew with my mouth open, say "please" and "thank you", as well as to use respectful terms like sir and ma'am. I try to instill these same values into my seven-year-old son. This is quite an undertaking with a hard headed yung'un, but I keep at it. If you don't believe me, try coming to supper at my house sometime and hear me get on my boy's case.
There is a huge difference between being polite and being politically correct. While I strive to be polite, I certainly do not strive to be politically correct. Political correctness is nothing more than brain washing to indoctrinate people into ideas such as equality of outcome rather than equality of opportunity and of being obsequiously compliant.
In December, I wrote that I was dismayed that my first grader came home and informed his mother and me that we could no longer refer to a waitress or waiter at a restaurant as such but rather had to use the gender neutral term "server". Today I heard three more such paradigm shifting, brain washing, gender bending examples of political correctness.
My seven-year-old informed us that he and other classmates were corrected at school today over simple, everyday colloquialisms that are more than proper. My understanding is that the discussion of a career day was at hand. (Career day? In first grade? Why? Since when does a child at that age have any clue about a career path? But I digress from the topic at hand and now return you to my normally scheduled column already in progress.) When asked what career he would like to dress as, my son said "an Army man". A guidance counselor (so I am told. A guidance counselor? Really? In elementary school? You have got to be kidding me. But again I digress and return to my normally scheduled column already in progress) informed my son that she would prefer that he used the term "Army soldier". Thus the primary connotation of someone in the Army being a male has been destroyed and thereby opening the entire world of military life to all women, regardless of the task, merely by the change of a term. To quote our Registrar of Deeds, Craig Olive, "That's hog wash".
I was also told that other children were chastised for using terms such as "mailman" and "fireman". Apparently the terms firefighter and mail carrier are more correct. I will concede that there are many people in the fire service who believe that a fireman is a person who stokes a boiler and the proper term is firefighter. When I joined the fire service many years ago, that point was made many times by the far more experienced pyro-gladiators. However, this was not a matter of gender bending, it was a matter of terminology. As a matter of fact, I recall the chief of that department informing us that the requirement to join that department would be that one would have to stand three or so feet away from the wall and be able to "make water" upon it. For further reference, I can only point you to the Bible in 1 Samuel 25:22 as one of six examples of which I write. The Bible was certainly not politically correct, nor was it gender sensitive when it came to a lot of things. I have read 26 different translations and paraphrases of that particular verse and some modern translations are fairly politically correct, but on that one it is hard to beat Ye Olde King James version.
If the purpose of political correctness is to take away the alleged offensiveness of normal speech, then I guess I can no longer refer to the Mexican ditch digger as such. I guess that I would have to now call him an "undocumented manual turf extraction technician". Sorry, but I am not going to go the distance on that one. In high school we nicknamed a teacher who spent summers digging graves for a cemetery "Digger". As much as he disliked the nickname, I doubt he would have preferred manual turf extraction technician any better.
Don't let the indoctrination whisk away you or your family. At the dinner table this evening while having this discussion, I told my boy that when monkeys flew out of my posterior, then I would give in and exclusively refer to waitresses as servers, Army men as Army soldiers, and my mailman as a mail carrier. I may use those terms from time to time in normal conversation, however I will never give in towards discounting the other terms of use. Yes, I am just that obstinate. I prefer freedom and common sense over politically correct fertilizer.
There is a huge difference between being polite and being politically correct. While I strive to be polite, I certainly do not strive to be politically correct. Political correctness is nothing more than brain washing to indoctrinate people into ideas such as equality of outcome rather than equality of opportunity and of being obsequiously compliant.
In December, I wrote that I was dismayed that my first grader came home and informed his mother and me that we could no longer refer to a waitress or waiter at a restaurant as such but rather had to use the gender neutral term "server". Today I heard three more such paradigm shifting, brain washing, gender bending examples of political correctness.
My seven-year-old informed us that he and other classmates were corrected at school today over simple, everyday colloquialisms that are more than proper. My understanding is that the discussion of a career day was at hand. (Career day? In first grade? Why? Since when does a child at that age have any clue about a career path? But I digress from the topic at hand and now return you to my normally scheduled column already in progress.) When asked what career he would like to dress as, my son said "an Army man". A guidance counselor (so I am told. A guidance counselor? Really? In elementary school? You have got to be kidding me. But again I digress and return to my normally scheduled column already in progress) informed my son that she would prefer that he used the term "Army soldier". Thus the primary connotation of someone in the Army being a male has been destroyed and thereby opening the entire world of military life to all women, regardless of the task, merely by the change of a term. To quote our Registrar of Deeds, Craig Olive, "That's hog wash".
I was also told that other children were chastised for using terms such as "mailman" and "fireman". Apparently the terms firefighter and mail carrier are more correct. I will concede that there are many people in the fire service who believe that a fireman is a person who stokes a boiler and the proper term is firefighter. When I joined the fire service many years ago, that point was made many times by the far more experienced pyro-gladiators. However, this was not a matter of gender bending, it was a matter of terminology. As a matter of fact, I recall the chief of that department informing us that the requirement to join that department would be that one would have to stand three or so feet away from the wall and be able to "make water" upon it. For further reference, I can only point you to the Bible in 1 Samuel 25:22 as one of six examples of which I write. The Bible was certainly not politically correct, nor was it gender sensitive when it came to a lot of things. I have read 26 different translations and paraphrases of that particular verse and some modern translations are fairly politically correct, but on that one it is hard to beat Ye Olde King James version.
If the purpose of political correctness is to take away the alleged offensiveness of normal speech, then I guess I can no longer refer to the Mexican ditch digger as such. I guess that I would have to now call him an "undocumented manual turf extraction technician". Sorry, but I am not going to go the distance on that one. In high school we nicknamed a teacher who spent summers digging graves for a cemetery "Digger". As much as he disliked the nickname, I doubt he would have preferred manual turf extraction technician any better.
Don't let the indoctrination whisk away you or your family. At the dinner table this evening while having this discussion, I told my boy that when monkeys flew out of my posterior, then I would give in and exclusively refer to waitresses as servers, Army men as Army soldiers, and my mailman as a mail carrier. I may use those terms from time to time in normal conversation, however I will never give in towards discounting the other terms of use. Yes, I am just that obstinate. I prefer freedom and common sense over politically correct fertilizer.
Wednesday, December 16, 2009
Column for Dec. 17, 2009
I have been recently complimented by several readers about the fact that I don't sugar coat things and am not afraid to state my opinions. That has been either a great gift or a great bane in my life, depending upon how you look at it. Then again, that is why I am sitting behind the keyboard right now. I have a list of things about which I have been pondering. I do believe that I will touch on several subjects today from my list.
First, I read with interest the plans to perhaps establish an historic district in Selma. I find it equally interesting that the Town of Benson recently voted down such a proposal. Historic districts are nothing new. I have been familiar with hysterical, I mean historical societies and their work in other towns, as well. My biggest opinion on this topic is simply that something, whether it is a building or other object, is not inherently historic just because it is old. In town, the Mitchener Station building may be considered historic since it was in effect the genesis of the town. My house in town was built in 1950. By definition, it is qualified as historic. However, it is a plain single family residence, and nothing of noteworthiness occurs here except that this is where I usually craft this column and where I raise my family. There are many such homes and buildings in this town. Big deal. Perhaps the most interesting and most noteworthy thing in Selma of historicity is the Vick Building. Vick's Vaporub is a world famous product and was developed right down the street from my non-historic home. I am going to stop myself before I get into the concept of developing an historic district and the eventual resulting regulations and disrespect for personal property rights. It is allowing the proverbial camel to put his nose in the tent.
I despise political correctness, as you may know. I was amazed when I was informed that I can no longer refer to particular restaurant employees as a waiter or waitress. My six-year-old informed me that the proper term is "server" and that we should never call a waiter a waiter or a waitress a waitress. I was informed that this is the type of garbage that is being taught in elementary schools. So, a first grader is not being taught how to look at a clock and tell time in school but is being taught about parallelograms, trapezoids, and servers. I don't know about you, but I learned to tell time long before I ever learned geometric figures. Impressionable young minds that can not tell time can be taught the politically correct terms for wait staff, and I think I have to remedy both at home.
Is it just me or is North Carolina about the worst state anywhere for leaving road kill on the side of the highway? I have traveled through a good many states and do not recall seeing anywhere near the amount of dead deer, possums, dogs, cats, raccoons, and other critters laying dead on the road side as I do here in Carolina. What is worse is that these carcasses are left to rot for weeks, sometimes months. I recall seeing dead deer become flat from decay after months of neglect. Other states are very active in picking up dead animals. We could do a whole lot better. Don't even get me started on the litter problem here compared to other states. Enough about flat cats and smeared deer, though.
The Christmas holiday season excepted, am I the only one left in the area that flies the American flag every day? I am just curious. It used to be common to see people fly the flag regularly in many areas of the state and country. I now rarely see ordinary citizens fly a flag at their own homes except maybe for a few days at the beginning of July. I will offer my old flag and maybe even a flag pole and mount to the first person who contacts me and asks for it. My old version of Old Glory may be faded some and a little weathered from waving in front of my non-historic home, but she is still beautiful and stands for a great nation.
First, I read with interest the plans to perhaps establish an historic district in Selma. I find it equally interesting that the Town of Benson recently voted down such a proposal. Historic districts are nothing new. I have been familiar with hysterical, I mean historical societies and their work in other towns, as well. My biggest opinion on this topic is simply that something, whether it is a building or other object, is not inherently historic just because it is old. In town, the Mitchener Station building may be considered historic since it was in effect the genesis of the town. My house in town was built in 1950. By definition, it is qualified as historic. However, it is a plain single family residence, and nothing of noteworthiness occurs here except that this is where I usually craft this column and where I raise my family. There are many such homes and buildings in this town. Big deal. Perhaps the most interesting and most noteworthy thing in Selma of historicity is the Vick Building. Vick's Vaporub is a world famous product and was developed right down the street from my non-historic home. I am going to stop myself before I get into the concept of developing an historic district and the eventual resulting regulations and disrespect for personal property rights. It is allowing the proverbial camel to put his nose in the tent.
I despise political correctness, as you may know. I was amazed when I was informed that I can no longer refer to particular restaurant employees as a waiter or waitress. My six-year-old informed me that the proper term is "server" and that we should never call a waiter a waiter or a waitress a waitress. I was informed that this is the type of garbage that is being taught in elementary schools. So, a first grader is not being taught how to look at a clock and tell time in school but is being taught about parallelograms, trapezoids, and servers. I don't know about you, but I learned to tell time long before I ever learned geometric figures. Impressionable young minds that can not tell time can be taught the politically correct terms for wait staff, and I think I have to remedy both at home.
Is it just me or is North Carolina about the worst state anywhere for leaving road kill on the side of the highway? I have traveled through a good many states and do not recall seeing anywhere near the amount of dead deer, possums, dogs, cats, raccoons, and other critters laying dead on the road side as I do here in Carolina. What is worse is that these carcasses are left to rot for weeks, sometimes months. I recall seeing dead deer become flat from decay after months of neglect. Other states are very active in picking up dead animals. We could do a whole lot better. Don't even get me started on the litter problem here compared to other states. Enough about flat cats and smeared deer, though.
The Christmas holiday season excepted, am I the only one left in the area that flies the American flag every day? I am just curious. It used to be common to see people fly the flag regularly in many areas of the state and country. I now rarely see ordinary citizens fly a flag at their own homes except maybe for a few days at the beginning of July. I will offer my old flag and maybe even a flag pole and mount to the first person who contacts me and asks for it. My old version of Old Glory may be faded some and a little weathered from waving in front of my non-historic home, but she is still beautiful and stands for a great nation.
Thursday, December 10, 2009
Column for Dec. 10, 2009
I almost got it out of my system after my last column, and then I saw another news report of more of the race wars being perpetrated by the NAACP. Racism will not end unless all parties, regardless of race, stop the bigotry.
In Wake County, I was thrilled to see the newly elected Board of Education decide to stop some of the insane policies that were going on in there. This included an end to early dismissal Wednesday, and it looks like they may stop the forced bussing of students across the county in the name of diversity instead of allowing students to attend neighborhood schools. I see little value in putting a child on a school bus and sending them to the other side of the county rather than allowing him or her to attend a school a whole lot closer to home. That wastes both time and tax dollars, and adversely affects families.
In Wayne County, on the other side of our fair County of Johnston, school administrators a few years ago had that same epiphany of brilliance and decided to return to neighborhood schools instead of resorting to ineffective and expensive bussing. Apparently the National Association for the Advancement of Crazy People believes that sending a child to a school close to home is tantamount to the re-institution of segregation. That's just a dishonest assertion.
Segregation was the practice of exclusion and separation. Going to community based schools is a practice of inclusion and equality. There is nothing exclusionary about attending school with whatever fellow students happen to be in your immediate area. Regardless of your background, financial status, or race, you get to go to a community school.
The NAACP argues that many schools in Wayne County are almost completely populated by Black students. I fail to comprehend to how this is segregationist. If the admission criterion is that you live nearby the school, then Black people must predominantly populate the neighborhoods serviced by said schools. If they are predominantly poor, then the proportion within the school population will reflect that, as well.
Ironically, if the school population is primarily poor, then more students will qualify for free and reduced lunch at the schools. When that school reaches the magic number percentage thereof, they get even more federal funding under Title 1 provisions under federal law. In theory, this will lead to better education and accountability for academic achievement.
State NAACP President "Reverend" William Barber claims that Wayne County school policies have resulted in "poor performance statistics, including lower graduation rates, higher dropout and suspension rates, and stiffer discipline for Black students". Barber further claims that some schools that are "100 percent African-American with maybe one or two white children."
If there were few white children in the neighborhood by percentage, then I would expect that fewer white children would be at some neighborhood schools. To be sure, Barber is not claiming that if there were more white children at these same schools that they would have better performance statistics, higher graduation rates, lower dropout and suspension rates, and lesser discipline for Black students.
I do not for one minute believe that Black students are less intelligent, by nature perform poorly, and are innately prone to behavioral problems. By way of example, white children are the minority at our own Selma Elementary School and overall school performance statistics have risen the past few years.
Anyone who believes that Black students (or adults for that matter) are inferior and need government (or NAACP) intervention in order to achieve equality of intellect, behavioral standards, and academic achievement is truly blind to the truth. That scorns Martin Luther King, Junior's wish for a nation where his children "will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character."
Throwing around terms such as segregation is simply a tactic to incite people into angrily supporting the agenda. The agenda is to continue to have sufficient racial tension to continue to have a raison d'être. If we all, regardless of race, treat those of other races or even our own with dignity and the belief that all men are created equal (I remember that phrase from somewhere in antiquity) then we will dampen the racism that unfortunately continues in our midst.
In Wake County, I was thrilled to see the newly elected Board of Education decide to stop some of the insane policies that were going on in there. This included an end to early dismissal Wednesday, and it looks like they may stop the forced bussing of students across the county in the name of diversity instead of allowing students to attend neighborhood schools. I see little value in putting a child on a school bus and sending them to the other side of the county rather than allowing him or her to attend a school a whole lot closer to home. That wastes both time and tax dollars, and adversely affects families.
In Wayne County, on the other side of our fair County of Johnston, school administrators a few years ago had that same epiphany of brilliance and decided to return to neighborhood schools instead of resorting to ineffective and expensive bussing. Apparently the National Association for the Advancement of Crazy People believes that sending a child to a school close to home is tantamount to the re-institution of segregation. That's just a dishonest assertion.
Segregation was the practice of exclusion and separation. Going to community based schools is a practice of inclusion and equality. There is nothing exclusionary about attending school with whatever fellow students happen to be in your immediate area. Regardless of your background, financial status, or race, you get to go to a community school.
The NAACP argues that many schools in Wayne County are almost completely populated by Black students. I fail to comprehend to how this is segregationist. If the admission criterion is that you live nearby the school, then Black people must predominantly populate the neighborhoods serviced by said schools. If they are predominantly poor, then the proportion within the school population will reflect that, as well.
Ironically, if the school population is primarily poor, then more students will qualify for free and reduced lunch at the schools. When that school reaches the magic number percentage thereof, they get even more federal funding under Title 1 provisions under federal law. In theory, this will lead to better education and accountability for academic achievement.
State NAACP President "Reverend" William Barber claims that Wayne County school policies have resulted in "poor performance statistics, including lower graduation rates, higher dropout and suspension rates, and stiffer discipline for Black students". Barber further claims that some schools that are "100 percent African-American with maybe one or two white children."
If there were few white children in the neighborhood by percentage, then I would expect that fewer white children would be at some neighborhood schools. To be sure, Barber is not claiming that if there were more white children at these same schools that they would have better performance statistics, higher graduation rates, lower dropout and suspension rates, and lesser discipline for Black students.
I do not for one minute believe that Black students are less intelligent, by nature perform poorly, and are innately prone to behavioral problems. By way of example, white children are the minority at our own Selma Elementary School and overall school performance statistics have risen the past few years.
Anyone who believes that Black students (or adults for that matter) are inferior and need government (or NAACP) intervention in order to achieve equality of intellect, behavioral standards, and academic achievement is truly blind to the truth. That scorns Martin Luther King, Junior's wish for a nation where his children "will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character."
Throwing around terms such as segregation is simply a tactic to incite people into angrily supporting the agenda. The agenda is to continue to have sufficient racial tension to continue to have a raison d'être. If we all, regardless of race, treat those of other races or even our own with dignity and the belief that all men are created equal (I remember that phrase from somewhere in antiquity) then we will dampen the racism that unfortunately continues in our midst.
Thursday, December 11, 2008
Column for Dec. 11, 2008
There is nothing wrong with questioning governmental spending
I have been reading about the pending departure of the county's Superintendent of Schools, Dr. Anthony Parker. I read with interest the commentary in another newspaper about Dr. Parker retiring from his post. The writer said that by his retiring, Dr. Parker was actually saving the county money and was putting the county's interests above his own. I personally doubt that seriously, since I have also read from another media source that Dr. Parker is not indeed retiring, but seeking employment at another school system in South Carolina. He probably read the handwriting on the wall, so to speak, of a Republican majority coming aboard the county Board of Education and his probably forcible exit.
The Superintendent of Schools in Johnston County makes more money than the Governor of North Carolina. For that price, we have gotten a dubious performing leader and school system, in my opinion. We can make it better. We can do so with determination and not necessarily with money. We can find ways of saving money, especially after the state has demanded the return of millions of dollars worth of money they sent to counties for education. The State of North Carolina is required to balance its own budget. State government's spending has gotten it into trouble financially yet again, but that is another story for another day. We need to question governmental operational efficiency from time to time and the use of our tax dollars.
In my column that was published last month, I questioned school fund raising tactics and its necessity. I must give appropriate credit to the principal of the school, Ms. Janice Jett. Ms. Jett was kind enough to have read my column and wrote me in response to my column. We corresponded about that issue and I am glad that she took it as her responsibility to do so. For that, I publicly thank Ms. Jett. I was told by other parents that she was a "class act", and thus far, I can not argue with that assessment at all.
I recently emailed again about another issue. This time, it is about potential wasteful spending. I am going to share this with the readers since I also shared my concerns with most of members of the Johnston County Board of Education. At the time of my deadline for this column, I have not received a response, but there has not been sufficient time transpired within which to reasonably expect a response. Just as with the other column, I am going to share my concern. I do this to encourage others to do the same. My concerns may be unfounded in this situation, perhaps not. Time will tell. Either way, I always find it wise to question and scrutinize spending, waste, fraud, abuse, or any potential malfeasance at any level of government.
Here is my question of the school board and a school principal:
"My kindergarten aged son has come home several times with workbooks that we have been told we could keep, that were not required for school work, and did not need to be returned to the school. Just last week, he came home with a couple more of them. He has come home with one or two before. My question is simply whether or not these books are being paid for by the school with tax dollars.
If these books are being purchased for students, why are they not being used in the classroom, why are students not required to study from them, and why are we buying them if they are not going to be used? If these books are samples that are supplied by publishers (and I doubt that they are. I have never heard of any such thing for an entire class or for giveaway with no evaluation or usage), they why are they not being used and wasted on giveaways?
Please enlighten me on this topic. I get annoyed each time I see something that is as potentially wasteful as this and am being asked to buy classroom supplies, pay more taxes, swallow a salary for a county Superintendent of Schools that is higher than the salary for the state's governor, support bond issues, and support fund raisers."
What is my point in sharing this? It is not to disrespect any school official. It is to ingrain into my fellow citizens that it is appropriate to make phone calls, make inquiries, question authority, question expenditures, question accountability, and question ethics when we are the ones paying for it and are in essence, the only check and balance system against such abuses. After all, it is YOUR money. Make yourselves heard.
I have been reading about the pending departure of the county's Superintendent of Schools, Dr. Anthony Parker. I read with interest the commentary in another newspaper about Dr. Parker retiring from his post. The writer said that by his retiring, Dr. Parker was actually saving the county money and was putting the county's interests above his own. I personally doubt that seriously, since I have also read from another media source that Dr. Parker is not indeed retiring, but seeking employment at another school system in South Carolina. He probably read the handwriting on the wall, so to speak, of a Republican majority coming aboard the county Board of Education and his probably forcible exit.
The Superintendent of Schools in Johnston County makes more money than the Governor of North Carolina. For that price, we have gotten a dubious performing leader and school system, in my opinion. We can make it better. We can do so with determination and not necessarily with money. We can find ways of saving money, especially after the state has demanded the return of millions of dollars worth of money they sent to counties for education. The State of North Carolina is required to balance its own budget. State government's spending has gotten it into trouble financially yet again, but that is another story for another day. We need to question governmental operational efficiency from time to time and the use of our tax dollars.
In my column that was published last month, I questioned school fund raising tactics and its necessity. I must give appropriate credit to the principal of the school, Ms. Janice Jett. Ms. Jett was kind enough to have read my column and wrote me in response to my column. We corresponded about that issue and I am glad that she took it as her responsibility to do so. For that, I publicly thank Ms. Jett. I was told by other parents that she was a "class act", and thus far, I can not argue with that assessment at all.
I recently emailed again about another issue. This time, it is about potential wasteful spending. I am going to share this with the readers since I also shared my concerns with most of members of the Johnston County Board of Education. At the time of my deadline for this column, I have not received a response, but there has not been sufficient time transpired within which to reasonably expect a response. Just as with the other column, I am going to share my concern. I do this to encourage others to do the same. My concerns may be unfounded in this situation, perhaps not. Time will tell. Either way, I always find it wise to question and scrutinize spending, waste, fraud, abuse, or any potential malfeasance at any level of government.
Here is my question of the school board and a school principal:
"My kindergarten aged son has come home several times with workbooks that we have been told we could keep, that were not required for school work, and did not need to be returned to the school. Just last week, he came home with a couple more of them. He has come home with one or two before. My question is simply whether or not these books are being paid for by the school with tax dollars.
If these books are being purchased for students, why are they not being used in the classroom, why are students not required to study from them, and why are we buying them if they are not going to be used? If these books are samples that are supplied by publishers (and I doubt that they are. I have never heard of any such thing for an entire class or for giveaway with no evaluation or usage), they why are they not being used and wasted on giveaways?
Please enlighten me on this topic. I get annoyed each time I see something that is as potentially wasteful as this and am being asked to buy classroom supplies, pay more taxes, swallow a salary for a county Superintendent of Schools that is higher than the salary for the state's governor, support bond issues, and support fund raisers."
What is my point in sharing this? It is not to disrespect any school official. It is to ingrain into my fellow citizens that it is appropriate to make phone calls, make inquiries, question authority, question expenditures, question accountability, and question ethics when we are the ones paying for it and are in essence, the only check and balance system against such abuses. After all, it is YOUR money. Make yourselves heard.
Friday, November 07, 2008
Column for Nov. 13, 2008
NOTE: Because of a publisher's error, this column did not run on November 6 as scheduled but ran on Nov. 13th, instead.
Singing the school fund raiser blues
In general, Americans are a generous people. Statistically, they are the most generous of any nation. There are causes and organizations for just about everything you can imagine, all of which are looking for funding. Many get a lot of support from the generosity of Americans. If it were not so, then most of the sweaty, screaming televangelists, most of whom could use a course in systematic theology, would not be on TV today.
In my four decades on this planet, I have been involved with and/or solicited by most every sort of organization imaginable. One thing for certain is that I generally am not fond of fund raisers. There are entire industries dedicated to helping groups raise money. My favorite approach is simply a statement of need and the method of being able to help. That, however, would not help the businesses that expertly craft manipulation tactics and schemes to get money out of people's pockets.
When I was in Cub Scouts, we had fund raisers. We carried around these big, cardboard Tom-Wat kits full of cheap trinkets for the home. I also played Little League baseball. We dressed up in our uniforms and stood outside storefronts with containers in which we begged patrons to drop loose change. We sold chocolate bars, candy coated peanuts, light bulbs, had car washes, and whatever else could fund our endeavors. I have heard of co-workers having fund raisers for school soccer teams. We bought a cookbook recently to help a local high school band go to New York City to be in Macy's Thanksgiving Day Parade. Every year, I love buying my share of Thin Mints from little girls.
There is one common thread with all of the above. Charities, religious groups, the Boy Scouts of America, extra curricular activities at school, and baseball leagues are all organizations people either give to or participate in of their own volition. The most heinous sort of fund raiser is the one that has captive participation, is already by a group funded by force, and that the proceeds are not disclosed as to their designation.
I always hated school fund raisers. Every student was expected to sell magazines, expensive candy, over priced trinkets, wrapping paper, or some other sort of expensive stuff I can find at the dollar store. Now that I have a five year old that just started kindergarten, my wife and I have been hit with two recent fund raisers. Quite honestly, I am disgusted.
The first one was an annual event that seems to be a nation wide effort for a gigantic restaurant chain that has three hours set aside one day a year. On that given day, local elementary school students are asked to bring their families to patronize that establishment and a portion of the proceeds (probably a tax deduction for the business) will be donated to the school. The flier that is on my desk says nothing about what the money will be donated for or why it is needed.
The part that disgusts me is the absolute manipulation tactic used. We all know that a child loves to go to a fast food restaurant with cartoon characters, a playground, and chicken nuggets on the menu. When the event is hyped to young, impressionable children, a parent will be given a guilt trip to spend the money at that restaurant in order to placate a whining, crying child that can barely tie his own shoes. Ask me how I know. And yet we parents are supposed to trust that the money is going for a good cause.
My kindergartener brought home a catalog full of over priced stuff we do not need and expensive candy. I do not need fudge that I can personally make better at home or chocolates that I can buy far cheaper at Rose's.
School children are a captive group of victims. They do not participate by choice. Of course the parents are supposed to feel obligated to help their child succeed so they carry a catalog to relatives and to work. Ask me how I know. But a five year old? A kindergartener being conscripted as a sales representative? Have school administrators no shame? Children being manipulated into selling garbage nobody needs to raise money for a reason no parent is told? I hate being manipulated for money, especially for unstated reasons.
Singing the school fund raiser blues
In general, Americans are a generous people. Statistically, they are the most generous of any nation. There are causes and organizations for just about everything you can imagine, all of which are looking for funding. Many get a lot of support from the generosity of Americans. If it were not so, then most of the sweaty, screaming televangelists, most of whom could use a course in systematic theology, would not be on TV today.
In my four decades on this planet, I have been involved with and/or solicited by most every sort of organization imaginable. One thing for certain is that I generally am not fond of fund raisers. There are entire industries dedicated to helping groups raise money. My favorite approach is simply a statement of need and the method of being able to help. That, however, would not help the businesses that expertly craft manipulation tactics and schemes to get money out of people's pockets.
When I was in Cub Scouts, we had fund raisers. We carried around these big, cardboard Tom-Wat kits full of cheap trinkets for the home. I also played Little League baseball. We dressed up in our uniforms and stood outside storefronts with containers in which we begged patrons to drop loose change. We sold chocolate bars, candy coated peanuts, light bulbs, had car washes, and whatever else could fund our endeavors. I have heard of co-workers having fund raisers for school soccer teams. We bought a cookbook recently to help a local high school band go to New York City to be in Macy's Thanksgiving Day Parade. Every year, I love buying my share of Thin Mints from little girls.
There is one common thread with all of the above. Charities, religious groups, the Boy Scouts of America, extra curricular activities at school, and baseball leagues are all organizations people either give to or participate in of their own volition. The most heinous sort of fund raiser is the one that has captive participation, is already by a group funded by force, and that the proceeds are not disclosed as to their designation.
I always hated school fund raisers. Every student was expected to sell magazines, expensive candy, over priced trinkets, wrapping paper, or some other sort of expensive stuff I can find at the dollar store. Now that I have a five year old that just started kindergarten, my wife and I have been hit with two recent fund raisers. Quite honestly, I am disgusted.
The first one was an annual event that seems to be a nation wide effort for a gigantic restaurant chain that has three hours set aside one day a year. On that given day, local elementary school students are asked to bring their families to patronize that establishment and a portion of the proceeds (probably a tax deduction for the business) will be donated to the school. The flier that is on my desk says nothing about what the money will be donated for or why it is needed.
The part that disgusts me is the absolute manipulation tactic used. We all know that a child loves to go to a fast food restaurant with cartoon characters, a playground, and chicken nuggets on the menu. When the event is hyped to young, impressionable children, a parent will be given a guilt trip to spend the money at that restaurant in order to placate a whining, crying child that can barely tie his own shoes. Ask me how I know. And yet we parents are supposed to trust that the money is going for a good cause.
My kindergartener brought home a catalog full of over priced stuff we do not need and expensive candy. I do not need fudge that I can personally make better at home or chocolates that I can buy far cheaper at Rose's.
School children are a captive group of victims. They do not participate by choice. Of course the parents are supposed to feel obligated to help their child succeed so they carry a catalog to relatives and to work. Ask me how I know. But a five year old? A kindergartener being conscripted as a sales representative? Have school administrators no shame? Children being manipulated into selling garbage nobody needs to raise money for a reason no parent is told? I hate being manipulated for money, especially for unstated reasons.
Thursday, August 07, 2008
Column for Aug. 7, 2008
Welkum too edukashun in the Yoonited Statz uv Amerika
When the Selma Elementary School instituted a dress code, I pretty much supported the idea. Even when I was in elementary and high school, there was an expectation of appropriate attire. As I look back at old school pictures, I marvel at the clothes we wore, although they were not as risque as outfits often are today. They were funky looking clothes, but it was, after all, the 1970's. I still chide my mother for dressing me in such weird clothes whenever we look over a photo album together. In high school, I grew up in an area where flannel button shirts, blue jeans, and work boots were normal attire for a large portion of the school year. We wore Buck knives in leather holsters on our hips (just like in "The Dukes of Hazzard") to school every day and never thought anything of it, nor did the school administrators. A Buck knife was seen as a necessary tool, not a weapon. Anyway, rabbit trail aside, I supported the school dress code until recently.
As I had written previously, I have been active in the life of a boy who is now five and about to enter kindergarten. In a couple of months, this boy will become my step-son, so I have an active interest in his success at school and getting him prepared for it. His grandmother took him shopping for some clothes, but you don't generally find school uniforms at Macy's. I took him and his mother to Target last weekend to buy the requisite school clothes and supplies we would need. After all, the school system was kind enough to post the uniform code and school supply list on the internet for us to find (after hunting down the information by surfing a while).
Like I said, I was all for a school dress code. I believe in modest apparel. What I found, however, was that clothes that should be perfectly acceptable by public standards are not necessarily so for school uniforms. The real trick was finding clothing for winter while still in August, of which we found nothing but a few pairs of pants that met the criteria. We did find some polo or golf type shirts. The real problem was finding them in solid colors with no brand logo on them, and in the appropriate size 5. The boy already had some nice, appropriate shirts in his closet, but they had stripes and a Polo logo. Those shirts are plenty nice for church, but not for sending a tot to kindergarten, apparently. We can buy solid shirts in orange, red, blue, purple, black, white, or whatever color we want, but they can not have logos, pockets, or stripes. If the school REALLY was shooting for a school uniform, one style of shirt of one color should be required, but I digress.
For pants, a good looking pair of corduroys or nice, new blue jeans are taboo. Wow, that would have shot my whole school career attire down, except for the bell bottom hound's tooth or plaid pants my mother used to buy me, along with white patent leather belt. I do find the requirement for cotton twill only to be a bit excessive. We are talking about 5 to 10 year olds, not teenagers. For kindergarteners, we are talking about children who just recently learned to wipe themselves after using the bathroom, may have just learned to tie their shoes, and have recently gotten used to the use of forks. They may still often use "sippy cups". Maybe my future step-son is the "Messy Marvin" of his day (wow, that is dating me a bit), but there is extensive clean up after each meal. He play rough with me, his toys, and my dog, so I am dubious about not putting the lad in denim to go to school.
I am not disturbed so much by the cost of adhering to the dress code, though. I would have to buy him new clothes anyway, since he has grown like a weed just since I first got to know him late last year. We did find some $5 polo shirts and $10 pants. It was the exclusivity without adherence to a true uniform standard that sort of annoyed me.
Here is what DID annoy me...the school supply list. Parents are expected to purchase an entire shopping list of materials and simply turn them over to the school at the time of a parental conference. We are expected to furnish brand name crayons, markers, scissors, baby wipes, paper towels, hand sanitizer, Ziploc bags, tissues, dry erase markers, napkins, highlighter markers, index cards, and more. We are not supposed to put the child's name on anything except his change of clothes and his book bag.
I am sorry, but the last time I looked, we still live in America, not the former USSR. Furthermore, I just got my Johnston County property tax bill this week and I am wondering why I am paying all that money in taxes, the school system keeps asking for more money, we constantly are having school bond referendums, and I am being asked to supply basic classroom materials. Does the school not have a janitor? Do they not have cases of paper towels somewhere in that building? Are the teachers not supplied with dry erase markers to write on their boards? Chalk was used in my day, right through college and that worked fine, but I can understand using dry erase boards now. But still, the school system, with all the millions of dollars we are paying in taxes for their operation, should be furnishing something as basic as paper towels. If the school can not afford the materials, I am sure we can afford enough dry erase markers for the entire school system by cutting Superintendent Parker's salary to a reasonable level for what he does for a living. I will do the same job only better for half of what he makes. That is an official offer to the Johnston County Board of Education, by the way. If not that, then one less assistant principal at the elementary school would furnish all the paper towels we would ever need.
Why I mention the USSR is that by confiscating the materials that we are furnishing for the classroom as a whole, we are teaching communism. When I was in kindergarten, all I had to show up with was my daily lunch and/or snack. The rest was taken care of by the school system, which was much smaller than that of Johnston County with a much smaller budget and much older facilities. Furthermore, we learned. We did not have issues in which we did not pass mandates for performance. As a matter of fact, the state where I grew up used to consistently score in the top of the national SAT averages while having the lowest per capita state expenditure per student for education in the country. Thus, I know that education is not a matter of dollars and materials can be furnished for said education.
Sure, when I got older, I had to furnish my own book covers, but an old paper bag from a shopping trip to the A&P did fine. I furnished my own notebooks eventually, but they were MY notebooks for my use alone. By taking the crayons that I purchase and pooling them with that of others, we are employing a communist system. I was told by the office staff that 60% of the students at Selma Elementary are Hispanic and from families in which English is not the primary language. If Jose and Maria can not afford to buy a 27 cent box of Crayolas, that is their problem. It is not my responsibility to furnish their children with crayons, markers, glue, and paper towels. I bought the crayons, so I know how much they cost. I bought my boy some pencils with his name on them some time ago. I surmise that he will not be able to use them at school, since not all children are so named. We are supposed to protect the self esteem of some illegal immigrant children or even some poor family's kids by furnishing them with Crayolas? All this redistribution of school supply wealth has got to be all one big joke, right? That is liberal academia social engineering with lower educational results for you.
First, I am ticked that the schools are not furnishing these supplies after we are constantly being asked to "pony up" an ever increasing amount of tax dollars for their operation. Then I am extremely annoyed that our children are being taught communisitic principles for politically correct reasons. If you can not afford a trip to Wal-Mart or the dollar store for your child to bring his/her own supplies and not take from others, then I suggest that you forgo that next DVD purchase, 12 pack of beer, tattoo addition, or carton of cigarettes and buy some 22 cent glue sticks and crayons (at least the non big named crayons were 22 cents, but the school specifically requested the five cent higher Crayola brand). Better yet, let the school system slash its over bloated bureaucracy and maybe we could afford to buy the needed supplies instead of double taxing us by demanding a grocery list of supplies before the first day of school. It gets better, though. We were informed that we will be furnished an additional supply list later. Doggone communists of academia. I miss America.
When the Selma Elementary School instituted a dress code, I pretty much supported the idea. Even when I was in elementary and high school, there was an expectation of appropriate attire. As I look back at old school pictures, I marvel at the clothes we wore, although they were not as risque as outfits often are today. They were funky looking clothes, but it was, after all, the 1970's. I still chide my mother for dressing me in such weird clothes whenever we look over a photo album together. In high school, I grew up in an area where flannel button shirts, blue jeans, and work boots were normal attire for a large portion of the school year. We wore Buck knives in leather holsters on our hips (just like in "The Dukes of Hazzard") to school every day and never thought anything of it, nor did the school administrators. A Buck knife was seen as a necessary tool, not a weapon. Anyway, rabbit trail aside, I supported the school dress code until recently.
As I had written previously, I have been active in the life of a boy who is now five and about to enter kindergarten. In a couple of months, this boy will become my step-son, so I have an active interest in his success at school and getting him prepared for it. His grandmother took him shopping for some clothes, but you don't generally find school uniforms at Macy's. I took him and his mother to Target last weekend to buy the requisite school clothes and supplies we would need. After all, the school system was kind enough to post the uniform code and school supply list on the internet for us to find (after hunting down the information by surfing a while).
Like I said, I was all for a school dress code. I believe in modest apparel. What I found, however, was that clothes that should be perfectly acceptable by public standards are not necessarily so for school uniforms. The real trick was finding clothing for winter while still in August, of which we found nothing but a few pairs of pants that met the criteria. We did find some polo or golf type shirts. The real problem was finding them in solid colors with no brand logo on them, and in the appropriate size 5. The boy already had some nice, appropriate shirts in his closet, but they had stripes and a Polo logo. Those shirts are plenty nice for church, but not for sending a tot to kindergarten, apparently. We can buy solid shirts in orange, red, blue, purple, black, white, or whatever color we want, but they can not have logos, pockets, or stripes. If the school REALLY was shooting for a school uniform, one style of shirt of one color should be required, but I digress.
For pants, a good looking pair of corduroys or nice, new blue jeans are taboo. Wow, that would have shot my whole school career attire down, except for the bell bottom hound's tooth or plaid pants my mother used to buy me, along with white patent leather belt. I do find the requirement for cotton twill only to be a bit excessive. We are talking about 5 to 10 year olds, not teenagers. For kindergarteners, we are talking about children who just recently learned to wipe themselves after using the bathroom, may have just learned to tie their shoes, and have recently gotten used to the use of forks. They may still often use "sippy cups". Maybe my future step-son is the "Messy Marvin" of his day (wow, that is dating me a bit), but there is extensive clean up after each meal. He play rough with me, his toys, and my dog, so I am dubious about not putting the lad in denim to go to school.
I am not disturbed so much by the cost of adhering to the dress code, though. I would have to buy him new clothes anyway, since he has grown like a weed just since I first got to know him late last year. We did find some $5 polo shirts and $10 pants. It was the exclusivity without adherence to a true uniform standard that sort of annoyed me.
Here is what DID annoy me...the school supply list. Parents are expected to purchase an entire shopping list of materials and simply turn them over to the school at the time of a parental conference. We are expected to furnish brand name crayons, markers, scissors, baby wipes, paper towels, hand sanitizer, Ziploc bags, tissues, dry erase markers, napkins, highlighter markers, index cards, and more. We are not supposed to put the child's name on anything except his change of clothes and his book bag.
I am sorry, but the last time I looked, we still live in America, not the former USSR. Furthermore, I just got my Johnston County property tax bill this week and I am wondering why I am paying all that money in taxes, the school system keeps asking for more money, we constantly are having school bond referendums, and I am being asked to supply basic classroom materials. Does the school not have a janitor? Do they not have cases of paper towels somewhere in that building? Are the teachers not supplied with dry erase markers to write on their boards? Chalk was used in my day, right through college and that worked fine, but I can understand using dry erase boards now. But still, the school system, with all the millions of dollars we are paying in taxes for their operation, should be furnishing something as basic as paper towels. If the school can not afford the materials, I am sure we can afford enough dry erase markers for the entire school system by cutting Superintendent Parker's salary to a reasonable level for what he does for a living. I will do the same job only better for half of what he makes. That is an official offer to the Johnston County Board of Education, by the way. If not that, then one less assistant principal at the elementary school would furnish all the paper towels we would ever need.
Why I mention the USSR is that by confiscating the materials that we are furnishing for the classroom as a whole, we are teaching communism. When I was in kindergarten, all I had to show up with was my daily lunch and/or snack. The rest was taken care of by the school system, which was much smaller than that of Johnston County with a much smaller budget and much older facilities. Furthermore, we learned. We did not have issues in which we did not pass mandates for performance. As a matter of fact, the state where I grew up used to consistently score in the top of the national SAT averages while having the lowest per capita state expenditure per student for education in the country. Thus, I know that education is not a matter of dollars and materials can be furnished for said education.
Sure, when I got older, I had to furnish my own book covers, but an old paper bag from a shopping trip to the A&P did fine. I furnished my own notebooks eventually, but they were MY notebooks for my use alone. By taking the crayons that I purchase and pooling them with that of others, we are employing a communist system. I was told by the office staff that 60% of the students at Selma Elementary are Hispanic and from families in which English is not the primary language. If Jose and Maria can not afford to buy a 27 cent box of Crayolas, that is their problem. It is not my responsibility to furnish their children with crayons, markers, glue, and paper towels. I bought the crayons, so I know how much they cost. I bought my boy some pencils with his name on them some time ago. I surmise that he will not be able to use them at school, since not all children are so named. We are supposed to protect the self esteem of some illegal immigrant children or even some poor family's kids by furnishing them with Crayolas? All this redistribution of school supply wealth has got to be all one big joke, right? That is liberal academia social engineering with lower educational results for you.
First, I am ticked that the schools are not furnishing these supplies after we are constantly being asked to "pony up" an ever increasing amount of tax dollars for their operation. Then I am extremely annoyed that our children are being taught communisitic principles for politically correct reasons. If you can not afford a trip to Wal-Mart or the dollar store for your child to bring his/her own supplies and not take from others, then I suggest that you forgo that next DVD purchase, 12 pack of beer, tattoo addition, or carton of cigarettes and buy some 22 cent glue sticks and crayons (at least the non big named crayons were 22 cents, but the school specifically requested the five cent higher Crayola brand). Better yet, let the school system slash its over bloated bureaucracy and maybe we could afford to buy the needed supplies instead of double taxing us by demanding a grocery list of supplies before the first day of school. It gets better, though. We were informed that we will be furnished an additional supply list later. Doggone communists of academia. I miss America.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
