Relatives of mine in the UK have told me about their education system, and while it might have a socialist feel, it does seem to be a somewhat worthwhile talking point.
Between the ages of 12 and 15 (please don't quote me, as I am not absolutely sure) students are given an aptitude test to determine whether they go to university, or go to trade school.
What would you think about that? There are obviously some questions to be asked there, but we seperated the "high quality" student from the rest of the pack early on, would we be ahead of the game?
I do not object to technical, trade, and college prep tracks. I object to the government (the public school system) making the determination of which track a kid chooses. If a kid is not college material, chooses the college prep track and ends up never getting into college...so be it.
40% of what? what is special ed funding, who came up the the amounts?
I understand that, but who sets the budget? Was it agreed upon, or is the fed simply funding 40% of what they believe to be reasonable in a budget?it costs more to educate kids with special needs because of various requirements. because the need of assistant technology, etc. its a heavy burden on the school system finacially. the fed is suposed to support 40% of the special ed budget/
I understand that, but who sets the budget? Was it agreed upon, or is the fed simply funding 40% of what they believe to be reasonable in a budget?
the fed is only funding 14% of their promised 40%. the budgets are based upon district and state need. number of students in special ed/the cost to educate them (services etc) that cost is estimated per student, and the federal government is supposed to pick up the tab on 40% of that overall cost.
I stand corrected. however, I will continue to maintain that children of illegal immigrants shouldn't be in public schools. At the very least, they shouldn't be mainstreamed until they are proficient in English.
Just playing devil's advocate, but if the program in Tennessee costs 100,000 and the government pays 40,000, they're fully funding in Tennessee. However, if they say it costs 500,000 in New York, and the government is paying 100,000 it's considered underfunded by the percentage benchmark.
I don't like percentages when the costs vary from state to state, city to city.