wrote in message
...
On Fri, 7 May 2010 19:12:56 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

wrote in message
. ..
On Fri, 7 May 2010 15:16:17 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

wrote in message
m...
On Fri, 7 May 2010 11:31:59 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

Unfortunately it does interfere with the programs tho. If you can't
get 20% minority participation, you can't have the program.
They are trying to fix the problem Harry was talking about, the lack
of parental participation, with a quota system and a big yellow bus.



Well, there's always a trade off isn't there.


Unfortunately the trade off is the quality of the education for most
of the children to meet some obsolete goal set in the 60s for a
problem that no longer exists.
Nobody can complain that the school system is sparing a penny on any
student here. They spend over $17,000 each


No. It's got nothing to do with "most" childen. There are perhaps a few
who
are adversely affected. The vast majority are suffering from the lack of
quality education because of other issues. For one thing, the
underfunding
of No Child Left Behind.


Again, they are spending over $17,000 per year per student. Money is
not the problem.

BTW the best secular private school in town is cheaper than that.


Money is absolutely part of the problem. Do the minimal research. Bush
underfunded NCLB, which even Ted Kennedy thought was a good idea. He was
betrayed by Bush.


How is it a problem when we are spending over $17,000 a kid?

Some school boards may be short of money but ours seems to be rolling
in it. (1.4 billion bucks this year)
You seem to just be having a knee jerk reaction to an article you read
somewhere.
Federal funding was always a drop in the bucket here anyway.


Everywhere? Every district? Who is spending this? If it's part of the
bussing stuff, then very few districts are spending thatmuch.

As I said, NCLB didn't fund what it was supposed to fund. That's no "some
article" I read. That's a fact.

Federal funding may be a drop in the bucket there, but that's not the case
_everywhere_.