3 ms·

> Around here, the school district has razed the local schools and built fancy new buildings. I see this too. Might I suggest that the school board get voted

by bsder 5y ago

> Around here, the school district has razed the local schools and built fancy new buildings. I see this too. Might I suggest that the school board get voted out? Part of the reason why new buildings get built is because it's easier to get the funding for a new building than to get the funding for 10 more teachers. A new building is normally a simple bond proposition on the ballot and it's off and running. Hiring 10 extra teachers requires that the superintendent go to the school board (who will oppose it because "muh taxes"), then the local political entity (who will oppose it because "muh taxes") and maybe have to file a justification with the state. And don't get me started about how funding can always be found for new sports facilities but God help you if you need a new lab. (I would also point out that $500K gets you probably 10 teachers for a single year. You are thinking that $500K is some big amount of money when it doesn't even pay for a single teacher for 30 years (roughly $1.5 million)).

WalterBright 5y ago
$450k/class/year needs to pay for only one teacher for one year.
- aidenn0 5y ago
  2 teachers per BSDer's original comment, but it does sound like he missed the "per year" part of the $450k.
  - bsder 5y ago
    I did miss it. I, for some reason, thought that $450K was referring to the new buildings. However, I would like to point out that even if I take only $12K, that's $360K and that's what other good countries think is perfectly reasonably for that classroom. I do agree that if you allocated that $360K, you get roughly 2 teachers per 15 (4 per 30) students which is right at what you need. So, effectively wipe out the administration and we're good? Unfortunately, I never see that as a solution to "educational problems" either.
aidenn0 5y ago
I don't see how $500k gets you even 10 teachers for a single year; that covers the median salary, but in many places government employees have pensions and in most places full-time teachers get benefits. I would assume that even for the 50% of teachers below that median rate, the other costs of employing them puts them over $50k I suppose that's another point for "expenses in US that don't apply to OECD countries" from a sibling thread assuming that teachers' health-care expenses are not included in per-student spending for OECD countries.

by bsder 5y ago

WalterBright 5y ago

$450k/class/year needs to pay for only one teacher for one year.

aidenn0 5y ago
2 teachers per BSDer's original comment, but it does sound like he missed the "per year" part of the $450k.
- bsder 5y ago
  I did miss it. I, for some reason, thought that $450K was referring to the new buildings. However, I would like to point out that even if I take only $12K, that's $360K and that's what other good countries think is perfectly reasonably for that classroom. I do agree that if you allocated that $360K, you get roughly 2 teachers per 15 (4 per 30) students which is right at what you need. So, effectively wipe out the administration and we're good? Unfortunately, I never see that as a solution to "educational problems" either.

aidenn0 5y ago

I don't see how $500k gets you even 10 teachers for a single year; that covers the median salary, but in many places government employees have pensions and in most places full-time teachers get benefits. I would assume that even for the 50% of teachers below that median rate, the other costs of employing them puts them over $50k I suppose that's another point for "expenses in US that don't apply to OECD countries" from a sibling thread assuming that teachers' health-care expenses are not included in per-student spending for OECD countries.