Educating Your Children

[RockRaines]

Isn't this the bill that the Supreme court found unconstitutional for the pension reforms? Will that effect this part.

 

Also, you will find a big difference in funding for the schools with few special needs students.

This state government has proven to me that they give two s***s about kids with special needs. It's gotten progressively worse and when they hit 18 there is nothing available.

[ptatc]

This state government has proven to me that they give two s***s about kids with special needs. It's gotten progressively worse and when they hit 18 there is nothing available.

It's mentioned in the bill as the % of funding going from 13 to 18.

 

Being in education I agree with you but it's in the bill.

 

I don't think any of it will be enacted due to the unconstitutional ruling so it will all be negotiated again. Who knows what it will look like next time. The only reason it passed that time was because it was tied to the pension reform that most wanted.

[southsider2k5]

There is a proposed bill that will change the funding of the schools. Currently, Illinois is only one of two states that fund the schools by local taxes. Illinois is proposing switching to the national norm where all of the taxes for schools go into one fund and is dispersed to all schools in the state. The priorities for funding go to 1. percentage of low income students, 2. percentage of ESL and 3. percentage of special needs students. I'm not positive that is the order but those are the three priorities in the current proposal.

 

It is currently just a proposal but it has a great deal of support. The unions are sending out info as it really effects some districts.

 

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/201...-school-funding

 

http://www.rebootillinois.com/2015/03/25/e...-formula/35412/

 

http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/state_edwat...gnificant_.html

 

 

Here are just a few references but you can find many more just looking online.

 

This is what Indiana does.

[RockRaines]

This is what Indiana does.

I believe Indiana also supplements costs for local schools with local taxes like sales tax etc. I'm not sure Indiana's spending model is anything that should be used as a model though..

 

Edit, I take that back. It appears that local governments have approved extra taxes for their schools so areas like Carmel are back to their old tax levels to assure better education. Exactly what I would expect to happen.

Edited December 16, 2015 by RockRaines

[RockRaines]

The large benefit to having one state budget for all schools is that (like Indiana) your property taxes go way down and sometimes are even capped. This is what gets a lot of these bills passed. However, i think what cannot be ignored is that many people are ok with having to pay outrageous property tax for the benefit of having great schools. Illinois is trying to find that balance between the amount that should go in the bucket while allowing local districts to tax their residents more for better quality education. Most likely thats why the formula they use for disbursement is so difficult to understand.

[iamshack]

The large benefit to having one state budget for all schools is that (like Indiana) your property taxes go way down and sometimes are even capped. This is what gets a lot of these bills passed. However, i think what cannot be ignored is that many people are ok with having to pay outrageous property tax for the benefit of having great schools. Illinois is trying to find that balance between the amount that should go in the bucket while allowing local districts to tax their residents more for better quality education. Most likely thats why the formula they use for disbursement is so difficult to understand.

And you run into all kinds of problems like you have mentioned...people like yourself may have just purchased there solely for, or largely in part, due to the outstanding school district. While the property taxes can always be changed, the property values are also an indicator of the school district, not simply the property taxes. It is also obviously not an equitable solution to significantly impact the property values of the folks who have lived there for many years.

 

I'm not sure how you make any kind of a radical departure without significantly harming property values in certain districts.

[Chisoxfn]

You end up with supplemental property taxes in those areas (like the mella roos I was referring to in California). The areas with newer property and better schools / infastructure have them and it stays specifically in that area so those who pay the tax, get the benefit for the tax.

[ptatc]

I believe Indiana also supplements costs for local schools with local taxes like sales tax etc. I'm not sure Indiana's spending model is anything that should be used as a model though..

 

Edit, I take that back. It appears that local governments have approved extra taxes for their schools so areas like Carmel are back to their old tax levels to assure better education. Exactly what I would expect to happen.

Part of the illinois legislation (SB 1) also limits local school districts from raising taxes.

[NorthSideSox72]

A fully equalized state education funding system will never, ever pass. And it doesn't exist elsewhere either, they all have a state component (Most in a way that IL doesn't), but then various methods of add-on occur.

 

[RockRaines]

You end up with supplemental property taxes in those areas (like the mella roos I was referring to in California). The areas with newer property and better schools / infastructure have them and it stays specifically in that area so those who pay the tax, get the benefit for the tax.

Yeah I'd assume that would be the case everywhere here if something more extreme ever passed. People are willing to pay a premium to live in nice areas with nice schools.

[LDF]

the education of the children is next to being the mostly important item on every parents mind.

 

i will always give many plaudits to every parent who does their best working for that goal.

 

 

[CanOfCorn]

What is the difference between a nanny and an in home daycare provider

 

Nanny was in our home.

In home daycare provider was a small group of up to 8 kids in HER home. Basically, she was registered as a business with the state and used her home as the location.

[Jake]

I was raised in a situation in which there were three choices at the pre-HS level:

 

1. public schools, one for each set of grades

2. local Catholic public school, had 25 students per class (this was the limit, after that you are on a wait list; several cohorts never had anyone enter or leave over the K-8th grade term). I just checked the tuition. If you are have an "active family," then it costs $2400 for the first student, $1900 for the second, and $1400 for each other one per year. Active families must be members of the church, attend nearly all masses, and go to a few other religious functions. If family is non-active, price is $3000/$2500/$2000. You can get a one-time 10% tuition credit if you "recruit" another family.

3. local non-denominational Christian school located 3-5 miles from most people, located in the country. Had about 2-8 students per grade, I don't know much else about it. This is $3400/student, no special discounts. $200 book fee, $300 optional yearly bus fee each way. $80 fee if you want your child to be served lunch at school, which is not required.

 

Once you reach high school, the local public school is the only option. There is a lab school and a Catholic school 35-40 miles away (this school costs somewhere between $15,000-$20,000 per year to attend, depending on a few variables). From what I understand, the HS I attended is poorly rated and was under the gun from NCLB laws for failing to meet standards. 5-year graduation rates around 70%, free/reduced lunch eligibility applied to half of the 800-900 students. Student:faculty ratio and faculty turnover rates were/are below state standards. However, this is the only high school I experienced! While I loved to gripe about local politics and how this or that teacher was a total dunce, I can't complain much about the education I received. I had involved parents and a comfortable home life. I had admissions to the elitest of the elite colleges thanks great standardized test scores. I was able to do well at a college that was very demanding because I was apparently well-enough prepared from the variety of people and institutions that helped to prepare me.

 

There are two reasons that I hope to put my kids in public schools, whenever it comes time for me to have kids (so take what I say with an appropriate grain of salt). I have to manage my own risks, but my overriding preference except in the case that there is something truly terrible or unsafe about the public option is to get my kids into public. One thing is that I think it's important socially to be around the typical hodgepodge of kids you see in a HS. You might get taken up in the wrong crowd, but that's part of my responsibility as a parent to have my kid prepared for that. I feel like it was highly beneficial to me to be at a school and treated equally to people who were in some cases far better off than I was and in many other cases kids who were really struggling in various ways or by some other measure were very different from me. The other reason I want my kids to go to public schools regards my sense of civic duty. Again, I am no martyr and have no skin in the game at this point, but the school system gets a little better when I put my great kid into it. And I know that when my kid is in the school, I'm not going to let certain problems go unnoticed.

 

Generally speaking, my sense of the abundant research on education is that a great school can break cyclical poverty and improve the lives of children at risk. But for those who have the parents/resources/talent package, the quality of the school doesn't play a very big role in their future outcomes. Only anecdotally, more or less.

[StrangeSox]

Nanny was in our home.

In home daycare provider was a small group of up to 8 kids in HER home. Basically, she was registered as a business with the state and used her home as the location.

Ah got it, thought you meant in-your-home daycare provider.

[iamshack]

I was raised in a situation in which there were three choices at the pre-HS level:

 

1. public schools, one for each set of grades

2. local Catholic public school, had 25 students per class (this was the limit, after that you are on a wait list; several cohorts never had anyone enter or leave over the K-8th grade term). I just checked the tuition. If you are have an "active family," then it costs $2400 for the first student, $1900 for the second, and $1400 for each other one per year. Active families must be members of the church, attend nearly all masses, and go to a few other religious functions. If family is non-active, price is $3000/$2500/$2000. You can get a one-time 10% tuition credit if you "recruit" another family.

3. local non-denominational Christian school located 3-5 miles from most people, located in the country. Had about 2-8 students per grade, I don't know much else about it. This is $3400/student, no special discounts. $200 book fee, $300 optional yearly bus fee each way. $80 fee if you want your child to be served lunch at school, which is not required.

 

Once you reach high school, the local public school is the only option. There is a lab school and a Catholic school 35-40 miles away (this school costs somewhere between $15,000-$20,000 per year to attend, depending on a few variables). From what I understand, the HS I attended is poorly rated and was under the gun from NCLB laws for failing to meet standards. 5-year graduation rates around 70%, free/reduced lunch eligibility applied to half of the 800-900 students. Student:faculty ratio and faculty turnover rates were/are below state standards. However, this is the only high school I experienced! While I loved to gripe about local politics and how this or that teacher was a total dunce, I can't complain much about the education I received. I had involved parents and a comfortable home life. I had admissions to the elitest of the elite colleges thanks great standardized test scores. I was able to do well at a college that was very demanding because I was apparently well-enough prepared from the variety of people and institutions that helped to prepare me.

 

There are two reasons that I hope to put my kids in public schools, whenever it comes time for me to have kids (so take what I say with an appropriate grain of salt). I have to manage my own risks, but my overriding preference except in the case that there is something truly terrible or unsafe about the public option is to get my kids into public. One thing is that I think it's important socially to be around the typical hodgepodge of kids you see in a HS. You might get taken up in the wrong crowd, but that's part of my responsibility as a parent to have my kid prepared for that. I feel like it was highly beneficial to me to be at a school and treated equally to people who were in some cases far better off than I was and in many other cases kids who were really struggling in various ways or by some other measure were very different from me. The other reason I want my kids to go to public schools regards my sense of civic duty. Again, I am no martyr and have no skin in the game at this point, but the school system gets a little better when I put my great kid into it. And I know that when my kid is in the school, I'm not going to let certain problems go unnoticed.

 

Generally speaking, my sense of the abundant research on education is that a great school can break cyclical poverty and improve the lives of children at risk. But for those who have the parents/resources/talent package, the quality of the school doesn't play a very big role in their future outcomes. Only anecdotally, more or less.

Great post, Jake.

 

I tend to agree with you. I don't think a great school can hurt a student with an already great home life/involved parents, etc, but the return on your investment isn't as great either.

 

Although we all know there are certain advantages of attending certain schools that go well beyond your own performance or what you learned there.

[LittleHurt05]

Since we were talking about toddlers in school, my almost 3 year old had a "lock down " drill at her school today, where they practiced all quietly hiding in the bathroom . That's the world we live in now and it makes sense to practice it, but it was still a shock at first to hear about it. Although she thought it was so fun and keeps yelling "lickdown!"

[Y2HH]

Since we were talking about toddlers in school, my almost 3 year old had a "lock down " drill at her school today, where they practiced all quietly hiding in the bathroom . That's the world we live in now and it makes sense to practice it, but it was still a shock at first to hear about it. Although she thought it was so fun and keeps yelling "lickdown!"

 

Is this really any different from kids hiding beneath their desks like we did back in the day because of threat of World War 3? At least in this case, hiding in the bathroom can actually help. Hiding beneath your desk doesn't stop a multi-megaton intercontinental ballistic missile from melting you.

[NorthSideSox72]

Is this really any different from kids hiding beneath their desks like we did back in the day because of threat of World War 3? At least in this case, hiding in the bathroom can actually help. Hiding beneath your desk doesn't stop a multi-megaton intercontinental ballistic missile from melting you.

While I remember those WW3 drills, I'm guessing a lot of posters here weren't in school or even alive yet during the cold war.

 

[StrangeSox]

Yep, I must have hit that sweet spot between nuclear bomb drills and terrorist attack drills. Even after Columbine, nothing really changed locally.

[LittleHurt05]

Is this really any different from kids hiding beneath their desks like we did back in the day because of threat of World War 3? At least in this case, hiding in the bathroom can actually help. Hiding beneath your desk doesn't stop a multi-megaton intercontinental ballistic missile from melting you.

 

Ha. I think I am a bit too young for those. I remember hiding in the hallway for tornado drills or under my desk for earthquake drills but no WW3 drills.

[Y2HH]

Ha. I think I am a bit too young for those. I remember hiding in the hallway for tornado drills or under my desk for earthquake drills but no WW3 drills.

 

The WW3 drills were the best.

 

It was the only time in your life that you believed a wooden desk would prevent a nuke from killing you. As an adult, I realize that was the exact intent of the drill...to make the kids feel safe. It worked.

 

I remember a time wondering if the world was going to be over the following day...be glad you've never had to feel that.

[LDF]

The WW3 drills were the best.

 

It was the only time in your life that you believed a wooden desk would prevent a nuke from killing you. As an adult, I realize that was the exact intent of the drill...to make the kids feel safe. It worked.

 

I remember a time wondering if the world was going to be over the following day...be glad you've never had to feel that.

 

i really hate telling this, but the missile crisis with russua and cuba, those were, i don't know, i was too young to understand. but we were doing it 3 times then after the crisis once a month.