| Author |
Message |
    
tulip
Citizen
Username: Braveheart
Post Number: 3515
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, May 14, 2006 - 11:34 am: | 
|
I see with definite dismay that New Jersey State Supreme Court Justice Deborah Poritz is completing her service in this capacity.
I hope she takes heart in such evidence of her positive impact on New Jersey as three Mort Pye Scholars over the past five years, coming from Phillipsburg, a town in the Abbott category. Knowing this town as well as I do, at least for the past twenty years or so, I know that the schools could not always have helped three young people to attain such academic heights.
I also know that the Abbott decision helped this community from personal experience, with my own two sons. By virtue of the spotlight Abbott brought to this community's failings, we added to the (non-existent) textbook stock, augmented the education of our students through the introduction of computers, science labs, block scheduling, teacher training, and many other initiatives our post-industrial city by the River had not developed before the Ruling.
You in the suburban areas may not appreciate just how backwards the educational system was out here in the rural industrial hinterlands, and just how much of a serious impact the Abbott Ruling, and the efforts of many including the outgoing Justice Poritz was able to bring to us.
Thanks again, and congratulations on a true legacy, Justice Poritz.
|
kathy
Citizen
Username: Kathy
Post Number: 1293
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Sunday, May 14, 2006 - 7:47 pm: |
|
Unfortunately the Abbott ruling has been a disaster for many suburban districts. It requires state funding for the Abbott districts at a level determined by what the high-spending districts are spending, so the only way that the state can limit its spending in the Abbott districts is to cap what other districts spend. Hence the annual school budget crunch in SO/M. |
Factvsfiction
Citizen
Username: Factvsfiction
Post Number: 433
Registered: 4-2006
| | Posted on Sunday, May 14, 2006 - 7:53 pm: |
|
About time. |
Rastro
Citizen
Username: Rastro
Post Number: 3116
Registered: 5-2004
| | Posted on Monday, May 15, 2006 - 11:46 am: |
|
About time for what? |
Factvsfiction
Citizen
Username: Factvsfiction
Post Number: 492
Registered: 4-2006
| | Posted on Thursday, May 18, 2006 - 3:24 pm: |
|
Her leaving. |
tulip
Citizen
Username: Braveheart
Post Number: 3517
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Friday, May 19, 2006 - 6:02 pm: |
|
kathy: Have you forgotten that every out of district placement costs the district $40,000 to $60,000? Is that Abbott Districts' fault? Have you forgotten the boondoggle of the SCC? Is that Abbott Districts' fault?
Too bad borrow and spend, supply side, Laffer curve, curveball Republicans like to blame the poor for their problems.
I guess it will always be the case.
|
Lucy
Supporter
Username: Lucy
Post Number: 3756
Registered: 5-2005
| | Posted on Friday, May 19, 2006 - 10:56 pm: |
|
Great news! |
tulip
Citizen
Username: Braveheart
Post Number: 3518
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, May 20, 2006 - 4:52 am: |
|
the usual intransigence |
tulip
Citizen
Username: Braveheart
Post Number: 3519
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, May 20, 2006 - 8:26 am: |
|
It never ceases to amaze me how some people who live literally surrounded by evidence of the disenfranchisement of certain groups of people in our society, can maintain an illusion of not only the centrifugal nature of the importance of every tiny detail of lives focused exclusively upon themselves and their own needs, but also the absolute and total unimportance and insignificance of those who own or have less than they do. Incredible!! Remarkable!!! Historic!!! (Never since the reign of Louis XVI it would seem...)
Bring out the powdered wigs!!!
Where's my beauty mark? Is it a MOLE?
|
Factvsfiction
Citizen
Username: Factvsfiction
Post Number: 513
Registered: 4-2006
| | Posted on Saturday, May 20, 2006 - 5:55 pm: |
|
Judges are supposed to interpret the law, not create it. That is the responsibility of legislatures. The New Jersey Supreme Court has been a politically activist court since the Wilentz years.
Judges are appointed by politicians who frankly, are not looking for Judge Learned Hand, and whose choices are very affected by politics.
The Abbot decision has been disasterous for all concerned, especially the kids in those districts where the money has been misdirected on facilities and in paying staff lower six figure salaries. Now that the SCCC is almost bankrupt, the chickens are coming home to roost.
I would have much prefered 5-6 guys from Brooklyn with street smarts and common sense deciding that case out in the parking lot of the Administrative Building in Trenton. We probably would have gotten a better result for all concerned. |
kathy
Citizen
Username: Kathy
Post Number: 1296
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Sunday, May 21, 2006 - 6:59 pm: |
|
Tulip, You are mistaken if you think that I was saying that the Abbott decision was wrong. What has been a disaster is the state's means of limiting its outlays under the Abbott ruling by capping the spending of "wealthy" districts such as South Orange/Maplewood, so that every out-of-district placement (mandated, but not funded, by the state) is money taken away from general education, with no way to replace it. |
tulip
Citizen
Username: Braveheart
Post Number: 3522
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, May 21, 2006 - 7:11 pm: |
|
Yes, I understand you now. Thanks. Will respond in a bit.
|
tulip
Citizen
Username: Braveheart
Post Number: 3523
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, May 21, 2006 - 7:38 pm: |
|
What was the original reason for the caps? Was it to limit the seemingly limitless spending of the "wealthy" districts, or to create parity for the poorer districts? |
Nohero
Supporter
Username: Nohero
Post Number: 5416
Registered: 10-1999
| | Posted on Sunday, May 21, 2006 - 7:46 pm: |
|
The reason for the "caps" was to limit spending in the ratables-rich districts.
The Abbott vs. Burke decision compared spending levels, between better-off and inner-city districts.
The Christie Whitman solution was to try to put a lid on what better-off districts were spending on education. Then, "Presto!!!" that would limit what had to be spent on inner-city schools.
We here in Maplewood and South Orange got caught in the crossfire. |
tulip
Citizen
Username: Braveheart
Post Number: 3524
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, May 21, 2006 - 8:44 pm: |
|
What a mess, and what strange and illogical thought. Were the savings from the caps meant to be passed on to the Abbott schools?
Even if not, it seems that there would be no better way to widen the rift between the "wealthy" and the "poor" districts by making the former resent the latter for this arrangement. So not only would there be a rift and an obvious economic reason for resentment of the wealthy districts by the poor districts, but a political reason for the reverse.
So it seems the Governor twisted the original spirit of the Abbott ruling by adding formulaic rules.
Where does David Sciarra fit into all this?
Isn't he trying to remedy miscalculations like this one?
Is there really no way to save Abbott? As I have said, it really did help our schools, not just my own children, but many schools. I have worked in six counties, and numerous schools. The economic status of the community of the schools is very easy to ascertain when you are actually in the schools. Even smaller, rural schools in middle-class communities currently have many more resources than inner-city or poor schools.
Do you know how many schools have little or no library or reading room resources? There are many in New Jersey. Why can't fairness be written into the allocations? I really see no reason why children should have to suffer for the economic status of their parents, or their communities.
The fact that money makes no difference is a myth.
I served on a child study team in summer in Newark in 2000. They literally had no paper.
Try creating documentation when you have no paper.
That's just symptomatic. It really is no better six years later.
|
Nohero
Supporter
Username: Nohero
Post Number: 5420
Registered: 10-1999
| | Posted on Sunday, May 21, 2006 - 8:48 pm: |
|
No, the caps were meant to put a ceiling on what people thought should be spent in the Abbott districts. |
tulip
Citizen
Username: Braveheart
Post Number: 3525
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, May 21, 2006 - 8:54 pm: |
|
Wouldn't it make sense to have a cap for Abbott districts, while continuing the movement toward parity of some sort? |
The Notorious S.L.K.
Citizen
Username: Scrotisloknows
Post Number: 1455
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, May 21, 2006 - 8:55 pm: |
|
"Too bad borrow and spend, supply side, Laffer curve, curveball Republicans like to blame the poor for their problems."
Awwwww, how peachy, Tulip in true form, folks.
Well, if it ain't the Republicans fault, then by golly, who else can you blame?
-SLK
|
tulip
Citizen
Username: Braveheart
Post Number: 3528
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, May 21, 2006 - 9:11 pm: |
|
As I asked:
Wouldn't it make sense to have a cap for Abbott districts, while continuing the movement toward parity of some sort? |
Bob K
Supporter
Username: Bobk
Post Number: 11591
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Monday, May 22, 2006 - 4:13 am: |
|
Now we are at the point where the Abbott Districts are the best funded districts in the State and their has been very little improvement in the schools in those districts. Waste and corruption are rampant and the funding of these districts puts a cap on what non-Abbott districts can spend.
Abbott funding should be limited to the average spending for non-Abbott districts and the State should put more controls in as to how the money is spent. No lavish trips for the Super and cars for BOE members.} |
tulip
Citizen
Username: Braveheart
Post Number: 3529
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Monday, May 22, 2006 - 5:08 am: |
|
Bob K:
"Very little improvement" you say?
How do you explain higher test scores, better schools, better resources?
You aren't in an Abbott District. WHERE does your data come from that there has been very little improvement? Do you expect everyone to be going to Harvard within a year? We have kids going to Dartmouth, Harvard, Cornell, where there have been years when none have gone on to four year colleges. You have McNair Academy in Newark, proving that inner-city kids, given the right resources, can succeed enormously. You have all kinds of demonstrations of improved academic performance.
Look, Bob K, measuring students' academic proficiency, one by one, is my line of work. I have compared performances in many districts.
You are going to have to stop relying on conservative reports from journalists who are invested in keeping property taxes low. Regrettably, that's the source of funding, so people like you who suffer from high property taxes have a vested interest in refuting the progress of the Abbott ruling.
Just look at the numbers. For almost three years now I have been trying to put the data before you. Abbott helps. Numbers don't lie. Kids' performances are helped by the funding.
The superintendent salary thing extends WAY beyond the Abbott Districts.
That should not be the decider as to whether poor schools are helped, for goodness' sake!!!!
|
C Bataille
Citizen
Username: Nakaille
Post Number: 2631
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Monday, May 22, 2006 - 10:37 am: |
|
Tulip, McNair Academy is in Jersey City and it's success is not about Abbott Funds but, rather, about taking the cream of the crop of a very large school district (which includes many first generation kids from Asia, the Middle East, etc., whose parents are very education focused.) I work in Jersey City. From 3rd grade on, there is a gifted and talented program which takes only the upper quarter or fifth from each grade level and puts them together with a highly motivated teacher. No behavioral problems allowed and no learning disabilities. (We had a kid with Aspberger's who was at the top of his class but the principal wouldn't let him into the G&T class because of his distracting behavior. I thought the parents should sue....)
While the original intent of the Abbott decisions was laudable, the way they've been carried out is a nightmare for the entire state (except the politicians who thrive on this kind of divisiveness and the corrupt people who would steal from anybody and everybody.) Recently there was an trial of an Irvington district comptroller, I believe, who supposedly was getting oversight from the State during the state's takeover of that district. Is this individual's thievery the fault of the teachers or the students of the district? No. But they are tarnished even as they are robbed. Maybe accountants and managers need more ethics courses. Maybe they need to be tossed in with violent criminals instead of being sent to minimum security prisons when found guilty. How people can steal from poor people and children is beyond me. But this kind of white collar crime is just not that unusual. |
tulip
Citizen
Username: Braveheart
Post Number: 3530
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Monday, May 22, 2006 - 5:07 pm: |
|
How is Abbott to blame for their criminality? I believe there was criminality before Abbott. Using Abbott as a scapegoat for incompetence and corruption is a terrible shame. It's stealing from the poor, in effect, to blame a ruling that is meant to help the poor, for all the incompetence in and around poor school districts. There's molestation, incompetence and corruption in every socioeconomic class associated with schools. Is there not?
Please, see the forest for the trees. Sorry to misplace McNair Academy.
|
sbenois
Supporter
Username: Sbenois
Post Number: 15074
Registered: 10-2001
| | Posted on Monday, May 22, 2006 - 6:24 pm: |
|
Costello was always the scapegoat. |
tulip
Citizen
Username: Braveheart
Post Number: 3531
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Monday, May 22, 2006 - 6:34 pm: |
|
OK. That was funny. |
breal
Citizen
Username: Breal
Post Number: 893
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Monday, May 22, 2006 - 11:23 pm: |
|
The per student spending in Newark is high. Someone on this board said it was $20K last year. It is discouraging to hear from Tulip that Newark does not have enough money to buy some paper for the Child Study Team. |
tulip
Citizen
Username: Braveheart
Post Number: 3532
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 23, 2006 - 4:46 pm: |
|
That was summer, 2000. Hopefully, things have improved since then. |
Bob K
Supporter
Username: Bobk
Post Number: 11612
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 24, 2006 - 7:37 am: |
|
I think the Newark BOE members have had to give up their "company" cars, so maybe there is some more money available for education needs. 
|
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page