Site search
sponsored by
| Welcome, Guest |
|
| LOGIN | Become a Member | What's This? |
Please enter the following information:
| Email or Screen Name: | |
| Password: | |
| Remember Me | |
|
Forgot Password?
Didn't receive your verification email? Become a Member |
|
Jobs
Real Estate
Classifieds
Search for homes by MLS, classified listings, rentals, and much more!
The Lake Tahoe Unified School District wants to put a tax lien on all property for the next 35 years with Measure A on the June ballot, in the form of general obligation school bonds. I say no.
There already are two other bond issues on your tax bill that run for several more years. The school board has overreached on this issue and does not fully represent all the people of this town. School board members are nonpartisan elected officials who need to represent all the people, not just a select interest group. Measure A will give the school board, both present and future, a credit card for the next 35 years. This will cost you more than $100 million as taxpayers with the state matching funds; remember, that is your tax money also. With interest on these bonds, which can be as high as 12 percent, additional millions of dollars also will have to be spent; it could as high as $150 million.
Do you really trust elected officials and school administrators to manage all this money in a judicious manner? School board members and school superintendents, hired by school boards, come and go; they change on a regular basis. What sounds good this year may not next year. Where was the voice of reason on the school board when they thought this one up? They put it in the hands of consultants and surveys instead of reading the pulse of the community like they were elected to do. I can hear the chat around the table: We know there are ones that can't vote or won't vote. We can get this passed, just cater to a select few that will vote our way (I know, I've been at meetings like that over the years I spent in education). Cynical? No, just weary of elected officials who only represent their own agenda and interest group. The board has way overreached on this issue; they have asked for more than is reasonable.
So many of the ideas that school districts come up with to rectify the failures in the system are based on faulty and expedient thinking, and are destructive of the very system they seek to improve. These so-called career academies that they wish to build are just new names for what we used to call shop classes, music and theater. As for the technical academy, kids already have access to better technology at home than the school district can ever hope to maintain and keep up with. The technology becomes obsolete so fast. Buy some inexpensive laptop computers that can be easily moved and utilized very efficiently. Use this technology and the Internet resources, which are superior to any library or media center, for research and learning, for this generation of kids. Also, I can tell you that these are the most expensive types of programs to run in the entire curriculum; they're the least cost-effective and benefit only a limited number of students. These also are the first to be cut when there are budget concerns, because these programs drain the general fund.
The superintendent wants a "smorgasbord of choices, to discourage dropouts and provide a reason to stay in school." If the parents and school system have not instilled this in the young people already, it is not going to happen. These kids need limits on their choices - many of them make bad ones as it is. The worst part of all is this: The majority of the students, who are motivated to stay in school and do well, get short shrift. The time, energy and resources are focused on the ones that are behind and unmotivated, and thus we lower expectations for all students.
I spent 35 years in public education and watched vocational programs dismantled and reinstated at least three times. It is a cycle every 10 to 12 years. We reinvent the wheel again and again. Current thinking states that all children can learn and should have equal access to the curriculum. No child should be left behind; they should be able to go on to higher education and to be all they can be and aspire to do anything they want in life. It is discriminatory to expect anything else. Having the smorgasbord of elective choices will not excuse the student from having to take, and still pass, the basic education requirements. Measure A will not solve the problem.
- Peter Guth is a South Lake Tahoe resident who taught for 35 years in Ontario-Montclair School District in Southern California.
There already are two other bond issues on your tax bill that run for several more years. The school board has overreached on this issue and does not fully represent all the people of this town. School board members are nonpartisan elected officials who need to represent all the people, not just a select interest group. Measure A will give the school board, both present and future, a credit card for the next 35 years. This will cost you more than $100 million as taxpayers with the state matching funds; remember, that is your tax money also. With interest on these bonds, which can be as high as 12 percent, additional millions of dollars also will have to be spent; it could as high as $150 million.
Do you really trust elected officials and school administrators to manage all this money in a judicious manner? School board members and school superintendents, hired by school boards, come and go; they change on a regular basis. What sounds good this year may not next year. Where was the voice of reason on the school board when they thought this one up? They put it in the hands of consultants and surveys instead of reading the pulse of the community like they were elected to do. I can hear the chat around the table: We know there are ones that can't vote or won't vote. We can get this passed, just cater to a select few that will vote our way (I know, I've been at meetings like that over the years I spent in education). Cynical? No, just weary of elected officials who only represent their own agenda and interest group. The board has way overreached on this issue; they have asked for more than is reasonable.
So many of the ideas that school districts come up with to rectify the failures in the system are based on faulty and expedient thinking, and are destructive of the very system they seek to improve. These so-called career academies that they wish to build are just new names for what we used to call shop classes, music and theater. As for the technical academy, kids already have access to better technology at home than the school district can ever hope to maintain and keep up with. The technology becomes obsolete so fast. Buy some inexpensive laptop computers that can be easily moved and utilized very efficiently. Use this technology and the Internet resources, which are superior to any library or media center, for research and learning, for this generation of kids. Also, I can tell you that these are the most expensive types of programs to run in the entire curriculum; they're the least cost-effective and benefit only a limited number of students. These also are the first to be cut when there are budget concerns, because these programs drain the general fund.
The superintendent wants a "smorgasbord of choices, to discourage dropouts and provide a reason to stay in school." If the parents and school system have not instilled this in the young people already, it is not going to happen. These kids need limits on their choices - many of them make bad ones as it is. The worst part of all is this: The majority of the students, who are motivated to stay in school and do well, get short shrift. The time, energy and resources are focused on the ones that are behind and unmotivated, and thus we lower expectations for all students.
I spent 35 years in public education and watched vocational programs dismantled and reinstated at least three times. It is a cycle every 10 to 12 years. We reinvent the wheel again and again. Current thinking states that all children can learn and should have equal access to the curriculum. No child should be left behind; they should be able to go on to higher education and to be all they can be and aspire to do anything they want in life. It is discriminatory to expect anything else. Having the smorgasbord of elective choices will not excuse the student from having to take, and still pass, the basic education requirements. Measure A will not solve the problem.
- Peter Guth is a South Lake Tahoe resident who taught for 35 years in Ontario-Montclair School District in Southern California.
Ads by Google
Other Top Items
|
Related Articles
|
Most Recommended Articles
|
Comments
You must be logged in to leave a comment.
GET MORE NEWS
