"supporting" the public schools

[pigpokey]

I am struck by claims that it's supporting a public school to send one's kid there.  Isn't that just taking up a chunk of tax money that could go to other kids?  Isn't it most supportive to pay one's taxes while not actually drawing money off the school system?

I'm not saying it's "unsupportive" to use public schools, because of active parents volunteering and such ... except when compared to actually not using them.

[Stephenie]

Schools get money allocated to them based on attendance, so some people find it unfair to not send any child to public school because that is one less child therefore one less payout. Though with overcrowding etc I am not sure I really can agree with that mindset. 

[moominmamma]

But one less payout still means more money in the government education coffers. Which, overall, increases the funding available to the system. If 20,000 homeschoolers suddenly entered the school system in a particular state or province, you can bet that the per-capita funding to schools would drop. The size of the pie doesn't change when you have to slice it into more pieces: the pieces would have to get smaller. Sure, an individual school might get 426 pieces of pie, rather than 422, but the pieces will eventually end up being smaller.

And of course that one more payout is only an advantage to the school if your child, if enrolled, would cost less than that amount to educate. My children are quirky kids with unusual needs. I don't doubt that they cost more than average to educate. If the school gets $6,000 to educate them, but my kids require specialized evaluations, support, individualized programs and services that cost $8,000 a year, they'll be a net drain on the system.

Miranda

[serenbat]

my state gives no options - taxes support schools

doesn't matter if you use it or not - you pay

low enrollment at a large school cost tax payers even more! the building and the support still needs to be maintained

we do not get ANY financial support if you do not go public (ex. refund for private or reimbursement, etc.)

no opt out

no breaks

nothing

[serenbat]

If 20,000 homeschoolers suddenly entered the school system in a particular state or province, you can bet that the per-capita funding to schools would drop.

really depends on the state and how they fund their schools

my state has a very large HS population and in certain areas high private school attendance but that really does not factor into the public school funding here - most of the public school funding is property tax (and renters pay too) so certain areas are swimming in lots of money and everyone does pay 

[moominmamma]

Originally Posted by serenbat 

my state has a very large HS population and in certain areas high private school attendance but that really does not factor into the public school funding here - most of the public school funding is property tax (and renters pay too) so certain areas are swimming in lots of money and everyone does pay 

But regardless of where the funding comes from, if all those homeschoolers suddenly entered the system, the total cost of providing public schooling would go up considerably. Schools would have to be built. A thousand teachers would have to be hired. Unless there's some magic way for the total funding pool to increase alongside enrolment, the amount available per student is going to drop.

Miranda

[Imakcerka]

Our schools are funded by taxes and then by kids needs.  There are different Tiers.  We're currently at Tier 1 which gives us more funding.  60% of the students utilize the reduced and free lunch program.  We're also bilingual and have a huge military presence.  I fill out paper work everyear that states I word on DoD grounds.  Which also gives the school more money.  I volunteer and particepate in the fundraisers as well.  That money goes to fieldtrips and the kids really need those in my opinion.  I think the schools need more money.  And I feel the teachers do too.  I spend a lot of time there and there are a lot of teachers that fill the role of teacher, friend and parent.  Not all of them but quite a few of them. 

[serenbat]

Unless there's some magic way for the total funding pool to increase alongside enrolment, 

it is in already and if the population increases do does the taxes - my state does not look at an area and say this many HS so we don't need this money---with the EXCEPTION of a few counties that are HEAVY Amish (they have their own schools) and Mennonites (they also have their own private schools and most HS) they are much larger vs the public school need

public schools in my state are based on size of student population (that means HS that never use the public schools) these are counted into the mix - still is assessed based on property value - you have land and now build a home - you pay more=the school gets more, regardless if you have a child or not (many who retire to my state have a fit about this!) - you can have a area with lots of $$$ homes and not many children and the school district gets the $$$$--magic!

ETA- my state allows public schools to "keep" the test scores/records of non-attending students (HSers not private) so they look better on paper and get additional state/federal funding on top of tax money

Edited by serenbat - 1/30/12 at 11:09am

[moominmamma]

Originally Posted by serenbat 

it is in already and if the population increases do does the taxes 

I'm not explaining myself very well. Let's assume a state with a population of 10 million, generating 10 billion in education-related taxes to fund the schooling of 1 million public-schooled children. (I'm just making up numbers here, to illustrate the math.) The population of 10 million includes 100,000 kids who are not currently attending school because they're homeschooling. If those children suddenly decide to enter the school system, the school system now has to fund 1.1 million kids, rather than the 1 million they had to fund before. And the pocket that school system is dipping into to pay for that schooling has not become any deeper.

Miranda

[serenbat]

maybe you don't get what I am saying - 

my HSed child is already budgeted into the system, regardless if they attend or not - the funding is there- they are not counted out, nor are private school children - ex the area says they have 100 children - the school is set up for 100 students, regardless of only 75 attend and if the population grows to 125- the extra 25 are paying because the area is generating more taxes by having high property taxes - if you add on an additional bedroom you pay more taxes (= the ability to higher more teachers)- we even mandate how many people can live in a dwelling so they know the population and adjust the taxes---public school that have an area where a high population use private school make out better

[AAK]

Originally Posted by serenbat 

maybe you don't get what I am saying - 

my HSed child is already budgeted into the system, regardless if they attend or not - the funding is there- they are not counted out, nor are private school children - ex the area says they have 100 children - the school is set up for 100 students, regardless of only 75 attend and if the population grows to 125- the extra 25 are paying because the area is generating more taxes by having high property taxes - if you add on an additional bedroom you pay more taxes (= the ability to higher more teachers)- we even mandate how many people can live in a dwelling so they know the population and adjust the taxes---public school that have an area where a high population use private school make out better

Maybe different areas do it differently.  In OUR area, the school has X number of enrolled students.  They get Y dollars per enrolled student.  Therefore, since my child is not enrolled, they don't receive money because of my child.  MY taxes don't change because of my choice, but the school is affected.  

Amy

[serenbat]

it is the area, you pay school taxes here if you never had a kid

[moominmamma]

Oh, okay, that not what I thought at all! So the funding ear-marked for your kids is actually dispensed to the schools, even if your children aren't attending? Schools in your area hire teachers for 100 students and provide library books and PE equipment and classrooms for 100 students even if there are only 75 attending? Sounds like a good reason for a family of school-children to encourage all their neighbours to homeschool, so that there are more resources for their own kids.

Miranda

[Imakcerka]

How would there be more resources for homeschooled kids?  While I was homeschooled I could go to the school and take elective courses.  However I do not recall gov't funding from taxes going to HS. 
 

Originally Posted by moominmamma 

Oh, okay, that not what I thought at all! So the funding ear-marked for your kids is actually dispensed to the schools, even if your children aren't attending? Schools in your area hire teachers for 100 students and provide library books and PE equipment and classrooms for 100 students even if there are only 75 attending? Sounds like a good reason for a family of school-children to encourage all their neighbours to homeschool, so that there are more resources for their own kids.

Miranda

[moominmamma]

No, more resources for the schooled children.

Miranda

[AbbyGrant]

I never got the impression people meant that they were supporting the school from a financial prospective but rather from more of an involvement perspective.  If everyone with the means sent their child to private school or homeschooled, well there would be a big socioeconomic and educational gap there.  

[purslaine]

I do not always think they are talking about finances when they talk about supporting the local school and sending kids there.

Sometimes they mean they support free, public local education in general and are showing this by using it.

Sometimes they mean that parents are a valuable resource to schools and all school kids - so they send their kid there, volunteer there, etc.

[AbbyGrant]

Originally Posted by kathymuggle 

I do not always think they are talking about finances when they talk about supporting the local school and sending kids there.

Sometimes they mean they support free, public local education in general and are showing this by using it.

Sometimes they mean that parents are a valuable resource to schools and all school kids - so they send their kid there, volunteer there, etc.

Yeah, that's what I meant to say.    I'm not feeling particularly articulate right now.  

[pigpokey]

Everybody who owns real property pays local school taxes.  Everybody who pays income taxes pays toward state and fed education departments also. 

[Imakcerka]

I have no problem with this.

My taxes go to all sorts of things and education is not the worst of them.