Real Woman Fucking Rocks!!

[Obvious Li]

Teacher's aren't holding our kids or their educations hostage.



You have no idea the funding cuts we've seen from this government and the impact it's had on education.  People are sick and tired of the under funding.  Teachers are the ones who have put their livelihoods on the line to fight for our kids to get a better education.  We should shit on them for that?



I don't think so.

BC has increased the average rate of funding-per-pupil. It now stands at about $8,600 per student, an increase of 37 per cent since 2001. These increases have taken place even while student enrolment has declined by 72,000 in the last decade, a significant reduction.



I remember the cuts that occurred under Ralph Klein shortly after we came to Canada. The sky was supposed to fall according to the teacher's union, but of course it never happened. Sorry RW, but any government that spends less of my money has earned my vote.

the real issue is the ratio of dollars going to salaries and admin compared to dollars actually spent on educating students.......back in  the day it was 80% for students-----20% for salaries.........now it is 90% salaries and 10% is available to the students...that is the real problem......there is oodles of money available in the system....it's just the unions steal it all for there greedy members and fuck the kids...they couldn't give a shit about the students....

[Anonymous]

Teacher's aren't holding our kids or their educations hostage.



You have no idea the funding cuts we've seen from this government and the impact it's had on education.  People are sick and tired of the under funding.  Teachers are the ones who have put their livelihoods on the line to fight for our kids to get a better education.  We should shit on them for that?



I don't think so.

BC has increased the average rate of funding-per-pupil. It now stands at about $8,600 per student, an increase of 37 per cent since 2001. These increases have taken place even while student enrolment has declined by 72,000 in the last decade, a significant reduction.



I remember the cuts that occurred under Ralph Klein shortly after we came to Canada. The sky was supposed to fall according to the teacher's union, but of course it never happened. Sorry RW, but any government that spends less of my money has earned my vote.

the real issue is the ratio of dollars going to salaries and admin compared to dollars actually spent on educating students.......back in  the day it was 80% for students-----20% for salaries.........now it is 90% salaries and 10% is available to the students...that is the real problem......there is oodles of money available in the system....it's just the unions steal it all for there greedy members and fuck the kids...they couldn't give a shit about the students....

Where did you find those figures OL?

[Obvious Li]

BC has increased the average rate of funding-per-pupil. It now stands at about $8,600 per student, an increase of 37 per cent since 2001. These increases have taken place even while student enrolment has declined by 72,000 in the last decade, a significant reduction.



I remember the cuts that occurred under Ralph Klein shortly after we came to Canada. The sky was supposed to fall according to the teacher's union, but of course it never happened. Sorry RW, but any government that spends less of my money has earned my vote.

the real issue is the ratio of dollars going to salaries and admin compared to dollars actually spent on educating students.......back in  the day it was 80% for students-----20% for salaries.........now it is 90% salaries and 10% is available to the students...that is the real problem......there is oodles of money available in the system....it's just the unions steal it all for there greedy members and fuck the kids...they couldn't give a shit about the students....

Where did you find those figures OL?

the 80/20 was from a govt. report in the 70's...the 90/10 is a guesstimate based on funding available vs. salaries/benefits/admin costs currently.....could be 80/20 but makes little difference......the point is that over the past 50 years we have switched focus from funding students to funding union members.....a fatal error

[Anonymous]

the 80/20 was from a govt. report in the 70's...the 90/10 is a guesstimate based on funding available vs. salaries/benefits/admin costs currently.....could be 80/20 but makes little difference......the point is that over the past 50 years we have switched focus from funding students to funding union members.....a fatal error

I'll do a little searching, but if those numbers are legit, that is disgusting.



BTW, I remember in grade 5 our teacher got us to help make signs that read Klein cuts hurt kids and a bunch of other political bullshit. Yeah, she really cared about our education.

[RW]

Let's be clear on something here - TEACHERS educate students.  Not paper, not pencils, not buildings or buses - teachers.  You could stick a teacher in a field with a group of kids sitting on the grass with nothing and they'd learn something.  



Now the trouble with these percentages is what numbers are behind them.  School boards have two budgets - operating budgets and capital budgets.  Within these budgets are also specialized funding grants - ear marked money for a specific purpose like funding for inner city kids, additional learning support funding, technology grants, facilities grants, new school grants, curriculum change education grants, etc.  Teacher's salaries and benefits come out of the general operations grant.  All staffing comes from that grant and including all staff salaries plus benefits, I would say 80% of that grant being comprised of these salaries and benefits (not just teacher) is fairly accurate based on what I've seen of actual school board budgets.  I just pulled one out, and teacher salaries and benefits amounted to 56% of the total operations budget.



If you include ALL the funding provided to a school board, that percentage drops further.  I ran the numbers I have including total revenue for the year and that figure dropped down to 50%.



Now I'm not playing around with numbers or trying to push some agenda.  My calculations were done using ACTUAL figures from real school district financial documents to provide you with teacher salary and benefit costs.



Once again remember, this is a SERVICE based industry.  Staffing is where the majority of funding should be going in the first place.

[RW]

Teacher's aren't holding our kids or their educations hostage.



You have no idea the funding cuts we've seen from this government and the impact it's had on education.  People are sick and tired of the under funding.  Teachers are the ones who have put their livelihoods on the line to fight for our kids to get a better education.  We should shit on them for that?



I don't think so.

BC has increased the average rate of funding-per-pupil. It now stands at about $8,600 per student, an increase of 37 per cent since 2001. These increases have taken place even while student enrolment has declined by 72,000 in the last decade, a significant reduction.



I remember the cuts that occurred under Ralph Klein shortly after we came to Canada. The sky was supposed to fall according to the teacher's union, but of course it never happened. Sorry RW, but any government that spends less of my money has earned my vote.

I can address this as well...



Average per pupil funding means fuck all.  First of all, the government doesn't fund per pupil.  It finds based on "full time equivalent" (FTE).  So, that means if you have 30 Kindergarten kids going to school for half a day, they have an FTE of 0.5.  If you translated that to per-pupil funding, it amounts to funding 15 kids.  On the other hand, if you have high school students who take additional classes like those off time table, additional honours courses, etc beyond a full time course load, they are funded at a higher FTE like 1.1-1.3.  If a high school student takes less than a full course load, they are also funded accordingly.



This reduction in FTE does not lower actual operating costs barely at all.  The teachers are still teaching, the buses still run, the heat and lights stay on, the floors still get swept at night, etc.  No fewer students but less funding.



Clear as mud?



What you're not being told is all the costs they've off loaded onto districts.  They offered full day kindergarten which for many districts was under funded.  Why?  Because the funding didn't cover the cost of the additional teachers.  A lot of districts added heating, lighting and janitorial costs because they had to add portable classrooms to their schools. (Declining enrolment remember.)



Fuel prices have gone up drastically since 2001.



They off loaded insurance costs onto districts that was once paid on a provincial level (and under funded that as well).



They added carbon offset costs.



Buildings are aging because they are tight with capital money and the facilities grants no longer cover preventative maintainence so it costs more to heat and cool aging schools.



Hydro costs have gone up by a shit ton.



Etc, etc, etc.



So yes, the government has increased their "per pupil" funding. What they don't bother to tell you is that it doesn't keep up with the costs.

[Romero]

The average teacher in BC makes $71,000 and per pupil funding is $8,654. With thirty pupils, the ratio should be about 73% students, 27% teachers.

[Anonymous]

This is very interesting information Real Woman, thank you.

 :)

[RW]

Also, if you like numbers and want to beat the declining enrolment drum, let's look at it realistically:



An elementary school has 320 kids in it.  Enrolment declines by 50 kids in the following classes:



K - from 25 to 20

1 - from 25 to 20

1/2 split - from 25 to 20

2 - from 25 to 20

3 - from 25 to 20

3/4 split - from 25 to 20

4 - from 25 to 20

5 - from 30 to 25

5/6 split - from 30 to 25

6 - from 30 to 25

7 - from 30 to 25



No classes were eliminated due to declining enrolment.



There are no fewer classes, no fewer teachers, no fewer bus drivers, no fewer custodial staff, no fewer principals, librarians, secretaries, or maintenance workers.  How much in salaries did the school save on?



It costs the same amount to heat and light the school regardless of the number of kids in it.



It costs the same amount to maintain the building, keep the phone lines working ... you get my drift.



There will be some savings possibly in supply and photocopying costs.  You might be able to cut an Educational Assistant loose (depending on the special needs the remaining student base requires).



So the school just lost $400,000 in funding (50 less students at $8000 per kid) and there has been barely a reduction in costs.  



THAT is what the government fails to tell you when they chuck their declining enrolment numbers around.

[RW]

The average teacher in BC makes $71,000 and per pupil funding is $8,654. With thirty pupils, the ratio should be about 73% students, 27% teachers.

Why play with bullshit averages when you've been provided with actual numbers?

[Obvious Li]

it is all just bureaucratic bafflegab........stuff they give you Trotskyites at the meetings to counter the truth......which is this....if Educationin the province has a budget of 20 billion and 16 billion is spent on salaries/benefits/admin...then that is the number...all that other bullshit is just fluff and stuff.....money that could be used to provide materials and learning tools for the students are being wasted on wages for union members, which as we know produce union dues, which as we know funds the election of members of the NDP which as we know, when they are in govt. accept whatever settlement the unions propose...that is the main issue when discussing education.....following the money and thus the influence...the kids are just throw away pawns in the big game of lets make all teachers 1% ers.....trying to justify giving a retired teacher a pension amounting to several million dollars and calling that a "teaching aid" is disingenuous, immoral and should be criminal...you can argue the party line and repeat the dogma all day long.....it is still bullshit

[Obvious Li]

and Fash......stop encouraging this woman...just because she parrots what the central committee tells her doesn't mean she knows shit....these people have an unlimited supply of your tax dollars to produce what ever numbers they want you to hear......trust your gut instincts...there is a reason , a very good reason, why you are investing the money to send your kids to private school....if like RW, you think the public school system is wonderful then why waste your money

[Anonymous]

the 80/20 was from a govt. report in the 70's...the 90/10 is a guesstimate based on funding available vs. salaries/benefits/admin costs currently.....could be 80/20 but makes little difference.

You were right as usual handsome. This is from the American Association of School Administrators, but I'm sure the figures for Canadian provinces is not much different.

For example, while most public and private organizations and businesses have 35 to 40 percent of their budgets tied to personnel and benefits, the comparable number in public schools is, on average, more than double, between 80 and 85 percent.

[RW]

Shen, my numbers come straight from an actual BC school district budget.  I currently have hard copies of them on my shelf.  Total district staffing costs are in the 80% range.  Confirmed.  Teachers make up 56% of a budget's salaries and wages.  If you want me to provide specific amounts down to the penny, say the word and I'll happily PM them to you so you can do the math yourself.



American education figures are useless in supporting Canadian arguments.  You can't even really do cross province comparisons.

[RW]

God Munday, don't make me school you on how pension funds work AGAIN.  



Everything I've said is factual.  It's the stuff you won't and don't hear through the media.  And anyone is welcome to pick through school board budgets.  They are publicly available for scrutiny.  



Munday, we all know your opinion as you repeat it constantly but it hasn't negated one damn thing I've said.