I like how people like to throw around a Goldwater report as proof that an independent body agrees that we need reforms. Then you look at the Goldwater report and they tout Florida as a great example of how reforms work. Yet…. they ignore the fact that if you review the ALEC numbers, Florida spends nearly 30% more per student than we do in Arizona. Of course Florida is going to do better!

The legislature is holding us all hostage. We need to get the increase in place to have a reasonable level of funding in schools. We then need to kick all the elected officials out of office that have been there more than 2 terms and start a real overhaul of spending. Within the state, within the school systems.

Malcolm spent some time writing about the misrepresentation of his remark about public ed=work of satan. In fact, this was not what he meant, and his comment was actually pro-public education.

J. Davidson wrote in that apparently we don’t know what a “troll” is. It is a term for someone who high jacks threads on the web, not an ogre living under a bridge. According to Urban Dictionary:

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=troll

1a. Noun
One who posts a deliberately provocative message to a newsgroup or message board with the intention of causing maximum disruption and argument.

1b. Noun
A person who, on a message forum of some type, attacks and flames other members of the forum for any of a number of reasons such as rank, previous disagreements, sex, status, etc. A troll usually flames threads without staying on topic, unlike a “Flamer” who flames a thread because he/she disagrees with the content of the thread.

1c. Noun
A member of an internet forum who continually harangues and harasses others. Someone with nothing worthwhile to add to a certain conversation, but rather continually threadjacks or changes the subject, as well as thinks every member of the forum is talking about them and only them. Trolls often go by multiple names to circumvent getting banned.

So really, this thread is now closed for good.
~Linda

Since this has moved so far afield we are closing this post to further comments.

If you have something else that you feel is relevant to the initial post, please don’t hesitate to contact us at info@arizonaeducationnetwork.com (or to lisa@educationnetwork.com if your input pertains to her comments in the string above).

I do have kids in AZ schools though so all the sideshow isn’t funny. I don’t care how they spin it – the fact that my kid is in a class of 38 right now is horrible and any excuse to justify it is a crock. My business won’t hold adult training courses with anything over 15 grown-ups and you don’t need a study to tell you that trying to serve the educational needs of 38 kids on your own is a bit like trying to herd a bunch of cats in the rain.

Please download and read: http://www.arizonaeducationnetwork.com/2009/06/az-schools-examination-of-the-facts/

Thank you.

a=Total revenues Arizona (2005-2006) $8,833,520,000
b=Total revenues Arizona (1991-1992) $3,226,760,000

c=Enrollment, Arizona (Fall, 2006) 1,065,082
d=Enrollment, Arizona (fall, 1992) 673,477

The calculator says…
a/c= $8293.00
b/d= $4791.00

You will have to adjust for inflation.

AEN editors note to Malcolm’s post: no need to get your calculators out – the NCES Digest of Education Statistics post of per-pupil expenditures from 1959 to 2006 with adjustments for inflation (2006 dollars) can be found here.

We have had to delete several comments that were off topic or contained inappropriate language. Please keep in mind that from time to time, students do access our site.

If you would like to engage in conversation about a different topic, you can contact our team anytime at info@arizonaeducationnetwork.com.

Thank You~
Linda
Today’s Site Moderator

Hi Jeremy:

Yes – you are right – education spending as a proportion of the state General Fund expenditures means nothing without additional qualifiers. Please take a moment and meander further through the post and read the other statistics that are provided. We also addressed at length how spending statistics needs to be placed in context in our Arizona K-12 Examination of the Facts 2009 link above.

…just meandering through…but this statement means nothing without additional qualifiers….please go back to stats 101. For example, the budget in 1979 was $1000 (example only), and you spent $690 on education. In 2010, the state budget is $1,000,000 (example only) and you spend $$570,000 on education, guess what…your statements are plainly false. Without more information, you are simply spinning stats into a credibility blackhole.

Lisa again. I’m not sure if you are on the right website or not. There are plenty of websites out there where you can unleash ideology without letting the facts get in the way. This isn’t one of them.

That isn’t to say that we don’t want to hear from you. We do. Debate and opinion are important right now as we try to address education in our community. We just ask that you restrain any urge to post “facts” that simply aren’t true on our website (Anyone following this string will probably be relieved that I won’t go into your last post point-by-point, but as someone whose own children attended ‘government schools’ in Ireland, I can tell you that your attempt to characterize their system is wildly off base. Anyone who would like information on Irish education and taxation, please email directly at lisa@arizonaeducationnetwork.com)

We also ask that you stay on topic. This post was about specific school funding statistics in Arizona. We aren’t debating whether or not public education is Satan’s work or not. Again, if you’d like to start up a individual dialogue on any topic, please feel free to email me at the address above.