←back to thread

193 points bilsbie | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
jmathai ◴[] No.46000348[source]
I do think Covid forced people to ask questions they hadn’t before.

We have sent our kids to private, poor quality and top rated schools.

We saw a stark difference between the poor quality and higher cost options. No surprise.

But the reason we are considering home schooling our younger kids was surprising. It says something about a system dedicated to teaching children when parents think they can do as well or better.

That’s just education. The social situation in schools is ludicrous. Phones, social media, etc. what a terrible environment we adults have created for kids to learn both educationally and socially.

Home schooling has answers for ALL of that.

replies(12): >>46000393 #>>46000409 #>>46000478 #>>46000487 #>>46000848 #>>46001520 #>>46003678 #>>46007513 #>>46008078 #>>46008322 #>>46008468 #>>46008837 #
rich_sasha ◴[] No.46001520[source]
I suppose there are few talented, hard working people who want to teach, and they command a premium. Education is expensive and underfunded.

As a parent/carer you probably are much more motivated than an underpaid teacher who wanted to do something else anyway, and you don't have to motivate yourself with money.

By extension, IME, motivated and talented teachers in any school (good or bad) can do wonders. There just aren't that many. And as you say, school environment tends to be a race to the bottom - if Johnny can watch Tiktok during maths, I'll do the same.

replies(3): >>46007623 #>>46007760 #>>46008984 #
rahimnathwani ◴[] No.46007623[source]

  Education is expensive and underfunded.
Expensive yes. Underfunded depends on where you are.

San Francisco's school district has an annual operating budget that equates to $28k per student.

I've heard people in San Francisco say that schools here are underfunded. When I ask them how much we spend per student per year, their guess is usually less than half of the actual amount.

replies(3): >>46007686 #>>46008218 #>>46008959 #
triceratops ◴[] No.46007686[source]
$28k doesn't go as far in San Francisco because of the insane cost of housing and everything else.
replies(3): >>46007737 #>>46007876 #>>46008035 #
rahimnathwani ◴[] No.46008035[source]
$28k per student is more than enough to run a school in San Francisco. Let's assume we cannot take advantage of the economies of scale available to SFUSD, and we're running a school with just one classroom: 22 7th graders. That would cost SFUSD $616k ($28k x 22). What would it cost us?

  Teacher (all-in cost):                            $150k
  Teaching assistant:                               $100k
  Rent for commercial space in SF (~1,200 sq ft):    $60k
  Curriculum, books, supplies:                       $23k
  Technology (22 Chromebooks, projector, software):  $18k
  Field trips and enrichment:                        $10k
  Utilities, internet, insurance:                    $27k
  Furniture and equipment:                           $20k
  Admin/legal/accounting:                             $8k
  
  Total:                                            $416k
That leaves $200k unspent.

AND ... these numbers are deliberately conservative. Teachers work ~40 weeks per year, not 52, so the $150k all-in is really $3,750/week - very competitive for SF. The $18k technology budget assumes replacing every Chromebook annually, but they last 3-5 years, so amortized cost is more like $5k/year. The rent estimate of $5k/month assumes market-rate commercial space, but you could find cheaper options in underutilized buildings or negotiate with a church/community center. Furniture lasts decades, not one year. The $1k per student for curriculum and supplies is also high - you're not buying new textbooks every year, and open-source curricula exist.

If you were trying to minimize costs rather than be conservative, you could probably run this one room school house for $350k/year ($16k/student/year).

replies(4): >>46008368 #>>46009477 #>>46009491 #>>46009507 #
jorts ◴[] No.46008368[source]
As the son of a teacher and a friend of several teachers, you're way underestimating their workload.
replies(1): >>46008685 #
rahimnathwani ◴[] No.46008685[source]
I estimated that a class of 22 children would require one full time teacher and one full time teaching assistant.

What am I missing? My table has $200k left over so we could add another full time teacher at $150k?

replies(1): >>46009950 #
1. lazyasciiart ◴[] No.46009950[source]
Any specialized teaching: art, languages, in high school I understand they have a different teacher for each subject, a librarian, a substitute teacher on sick days, an individual aide for one of the kids to represent the special education budget…

But I remember you previously and you appear to want a school system that spends money on exactly what your child needs and nothing else.

replies(1): >>46010182 #
2. rahimnathwani ◴[] No.46010182[source]

  you appear to want a school system that spends money on exactly what your child needs and nothing else.
Providing for my child's educational needs is my job as a parent, not the job of the government 'school system'.

But if the government is going to operate schools and demand that we all pay for those schools, I'd prefer it if those schools were run for the benefit of students (and specifically to maximize academic achievement) and not for the benefit of government employees.