How much does public school cost our hs'ing family?

[TranquilMind]

How would I go about finding out this amount?

 

I'm just starting to look at our county's budget process and am curious as to how to decipher the answer to this question.

Thanks for any help you can offer...

 

 

We pay thousands via property tax, not only on our own house, but 100% higher taxes on our rentals, because of the great wisdom of our state in doubling the property taxes on all rental properties.

[duckens]

We're also paying for the convenience of having a building full of teacher ready at a whim to teach our children. (Within the reasonable time period of a few days/weeks to let the school system know, fill out appropriate paperwork, and get on the bus schedule.)

 

The school system HAS to take our kids. Whether they have major medical needs, behavioral needs, or educational needs (from dyslexia to "my mom never taught me how to do math when homeschooling"). And they have to take them on short notice.

 

I know there are several here who declare, "I would NEVER send my kid to public school!!!" That may be so, but many of us here live vicarious lives.

 

What if mom gets sick with breast cancer and dies? Will dad quit his job to homeschool the kids?

 

What if dad gets in a major car accident and takes over a year to recover? Does mom quit paying the bills, or does she put the kids in school and get a job? This happened to a homeschooling family in our county just a few months ago.

[Shellydon]

We're also paying for the convenience of having a building full of teacher ready at a whim to teach our children. (Within the reasonable time period of a few days/weeks to let the school system know, fill out appropriate paperwork, and get on the bus schedule.)

 

The school system HAS to take our kids. Whether they have major medical needs, behavioral needs, or educational needs (from dyslexia to "my mom never taught me how to do math when homeschooling"). And they have to take them on short notice.

 

I know there are several here who declare, "I would NEVER send my kid to public school!!!" That may be so, but many of us here live vicarious lives.

 

What if mom gets sick with breast cancer and dies? Will dad quit his job to homeschool the kids?

 

What if dad gets in a major car accident and takes over a year to recover? Does mom quit paying the bills, or does she put the kids in school and get a job? This happened to a homeschooling family in our county just a few months ago.

 

 

I think as part of proper planning, homeschooling families should have plans for these type of things. Life insurance for both parents along with disability insurance would go a long way to financially protecting the children of a homeschooling family.

[duckens]

duckens, on 11 March 2013 - 10:08 AM, said:

 

Does that include the cost of the square footage of your house that is used for homeschooling? (livingroom, kitchen (table), kids' bedrooms, bathrooms, and yard)

Our space would be used for a homework, library area anyway. We aren't taking away from something to do it.

 

......and on and on and on........

 

 

Tracy and Sheldon,

Respectfully, you are missing the point.

 

For many things, you say, "We would just use the stuff we already have in the house anyway, so it doesn't count (including the house)."

 

Newsflash: The school system is not going to get 25 sewing machines from your exMIL or a piano from Sheldon's mom. They have to pay for these things.

 

Even keeping the thermostat in your home set at a certain level, you still need to pay for utilities....which you did not include in your homeschooling costs. Imagine utilities at 78dF on a 5000 sq ft building. If the school system has to include utilities in their "per student cost", then you do, too.

 

Oh, and a building. If the school system "per student cost" includes buildings for students to learn in, you need to count your building, too.

 

Everything I listed, if the school system has to count it, you do, too.

--------------------------------------------------------------

 

It's rather like me saying to you, "I can have a vacation in California for $100. Why is it too expensive for YOU to go? You must be incredibly wasteful!"

 

And yet I would have free room in board by staying with relatives, discount or free tickets to Disneyland because Uncle so-and-so's neighbor is an imagineer there, and the grandparents would pay for all other entertaining (SF Zoo, Whale watching, etc). Grandparents would also pay for the plane tickets. We wouldn't even have to rent a car. I would, of course, pay for my own souvenirs (~$100)

 

You, of course, would have hotel, restaurant, and car-rental costs.

 

Your souvenirs cost $50, but your overall costs are higher, so you are accused of being wasteful....and you got less value for what you brought home, too, because the perceived cost is $4K for a few tshirts, compared to my $100 for tshirts AND hats.

 

(This is the place where detractors say, "But we have relatives in California, too!" or "Well, we would never go there for vacation!" Please don't miss the point. Just change the imaginary vacation spot to New Orleans or New York City or the moon.)

[duckens]

Sheldon says:

I think as part of proper planning, homeschooling families should have plans for these type of things. Life insurance for both parents along with disability insurance would go a long way to financially protecting the children of a homeschooling family.

 

 

That would be great, Sheldon! I sincerely believe that ALL families should have this as a part of their disaster plan.

 

However:

1) Let's take a poll of how many families on the WTM website would still be able to homeschool if this was required.

 

(For those unaware, Loverboy just looked into life insurance. Annual cost: $600. We haven't looked into disability insurance.)

 

2) Is this going to count as part of your homeschool budget? Jus' wondrin'.

[kiwik]

Here you would get a supervision allowance for homes hooking. I'm not sure of the amount - it is much less than what is saved by the state but it does cover books etc.

 

I don't want to pay for the armed forces either but i have to do that too. I also used schools myself as a child (okay i had no choice). You get to choose your government not whether you pay your taxes.

 

Ps.as our schools are nationally administered they ate funded out of general income tax along with medical care,police, army etc. We do only have as many people as a good sized city I more populous countries after all.

 

 

[duckens]

bethben says:

I do think a voucher system would improve education because when you have to compete for $$$, your quality has to improve or else you shut down.

 

 

We have this in Iowa. It's called "open enrollment." If the school system has room for your child, your child is welcome.

 

It has not closed down any schools, but more parent choice is ALWAYS a good thing.

 

Within the past year, we have had many friends from dd6's preschool enroll their K'ers in a school system 10 miles away to avoid 30+ K'ers in a classroom. (This is not the norm in our school system. A part of this was a failed bond for rebuilding several of our elementary schools).

 

--------------------

I have gone back and forth on vouchers for 25+ years. At this point, I believe that vouchers are a good thing as long as:

 

1) the school is accredited. These are tax dollars we're talking about.

 

Me being sarcastic: Let me tell you about my new private school. I plan to put the kids in front of the tv for 6.5 hours a day to learn. (I had a bf that experienced this tv education when his parents put he and his brother in Christian school as kids). Wanna give me tax dollars???

 

None of us want our tax dollars for substandard education for our kids. There are, however, many VERY GOOD small (Christian and secular) private schools across the country that do a superior job educating children.

 

2) public schools are funded for an extra % of their student body.

 

I posted earlier that the schools must take our children on short notice. Private schools or other school systems can say 'no' if they do not have the room for your student, or the skillset to handle your child (special needs).

 

The public school system is there for everyone. If ten new families with 6yos move into our neighborhood in the month of April, our local elementary school must figure out textbooks, desks, and school supplies for 10 more kindergarten/first graders....with less than 30 days notice. Unlikely scenario, yes, but still part of their mandate.

 

Plus, in the idealized voucher system, the kids left in the specific school are most likely the ones needing the most care. Lower income comes with less stability, fewer pieces of print in the household, English as a second language, and parents that are less engaged (than parents that shop around for private schools or homeschool).

[Shellydon]

Tracy and Sheldon,

Respectfully, you are missing the point.

 

For many things, you say, "We would just use the stuff we already have in the house anyway, so it doesn't count (including the house)."

 

Newsflash: The school system is not going to get 25 sewing machines from your exMIL or a piano from Sheldon's mom. They have to pay for these things.

 

Even keeping the thermostat in your home set at a certain level, you still need to pay for utilities....which you did not include in your homeschooling costs. Imagine utilities at 78dF on a 5000 sq ft building. If the school system has to include utilities in their "per student cost", then you do, too.

 

Oh, and a building. If the school system "per student cost" includes buildings for students to learn in, you need to count your building, too.

 

Everything I listed, if the school system has to count it, you do, too.

--------------------------------------------------------------

 

It's rather like me saying to you, "I can have a vacation in California for $100. Why is it too expensive for YOU to go? You must be incredibly wasteful!"

 

And yet I would have free room in board by staying with relatives, discount or free tickets to Disneyland because Uncle so-and-so's neighbor is an imagineer there, and the grandparents would pay for all other entertaining (SF Zoo, Whale watching, etc). Grandparents would also pay for the plane tickets. We wouldn't even have to rent a car. I would, of course, pay for my own souvenirs (~$100)

 

You, of course, would have hotel, restaurant, and car-rental costs.

 

Your souvenirs cost $50, but your overall costs are higher, so you are accused of being wasteful....and you got less value for what you brought home, too, because the perceived cost is $4K for a few tshirts, compared to my $100 for tshirts AND hats.

 

(This is the place where detractors say, "But we have relatives in California, too!" or "Well, we would never go there for vacation!" Please don't miss the point. Just change the imaginary vacation spot to New Orleans or New York City or the moon.)

 

 

We'll have to agree to disagree. I've spent many years working in public schools including administration. There is HUGE amount of wasted money. HUGE. Millions. No amount of reasoning or justification will change that. That doesn't mean the idea of public education is a bad one. It means that our current system is broken beyond repair and needs to be scrapped. It is frustating to have paid more than $50K into the public education system and watch students continue to fail.

[Shellydon]

That would be great, Sheldon! I sincerely believe that ALL families should have this as a part of their disaster plan.

 

However:

1) Let's take a poll of how many families on the WTM website would still be able to homeschool if this was required.

 

(For those unaware, Loverboy just looked into life insurance. Annual cost: $600. We haven't looked into disability insurance.)

 

2) Is this going to count as part of your homeschool budget? Jus' wondrin'.

 

 

At present, DH's job pays for both life and disability insurance. It was part of his negotiation when he was hired for his current job. We pay for mine out right. We've paid for it long before homeschooling. When you start young, it is relatively cheap. I personally would buy insurance before homeschool materials.

[Lang Syne Boardie]

Homeschoolers have to count the building and utility costs when they try to figure out where the tax money goes for public school, but no, they do not have to consider their mortgage and utilities as part of their school costs to homeschool. I think that's ridiculous. Children have homes, ideally, no matter where they are educated. My homeschooling costs include

 

lost second income

curriculum

wear and tear on house

more computers and other technology

gasoline to drive across the city for activities that public schoolers can do at school

ditto for activities

 

but my house is here and the lights are on whether I homeschool or not. My house is here and the lights are on whether I even have children or not. The bedrooms to sleep in and the flushing toilets are not homeschooling expenses.

[kiwik]

Most people I know find it much more expensive being home than at work. You don't heat your house when you are not there or have lights on or electronic devices. That's why when you are flagging (house sharing?) you always choose someone who has a job over someone who doesn't. :-)

[Serenade]

You do realize those per pupil allotments are averages. The majority of students cost a lot less. However, there are

 

students that get speech once a week

students that have a few periods of sp ed remediation a week

students in reading recovery or other remedial non sp ed programs

students in full day sp ed programs

students in full day sp ed programs at sp ed facilities

students in therapeutic boarding schools

students who have specialized nursing assistance during the school day at regular schools

students who attend STEM magnets (lab equipment and higher salaries) if the district offers

students who attend arts magnets (specialized facilities and staff) if the district offers

students who participate in specialized trade programs at the high school level

 

and more

 

again the vast majority of students are regular kids who do not get sp ed services and do not take advantage of any special programs. The majority of students cost significantly less than the per pupil allotment.

 

 

These things, largely due to ADA, are what caused education expenses to skyrocket. They were not part of public education in most areas even 30 years ago. IMO, many of these things should be coming out of a health care/medical budget, and not out of an education budget. Although I guess the taxpayers would be paying for them regardless. I think its easy to hide these things under the blanket of education, and it seems to me that the costs associated with these services are not readily and comfortably discussed. What does an equal and appropriate education really mean? Should there be limits, and what should those limits be? These are questions our country will have to grapple with in the near future, as education costs continue to skyrocket out of control.

[Serenade]

 

Yes, there are costs with losing a potential wage-earner. However, every single family I know with a parent working around their child's school hours is limited to part-time work. Parents in this situation are the "secondary" income, and often do not take home much more than 10K, when you factor in loss wages every time schools are not in session and weekly early-release days. Many are working simply to supplement the costs of sending their child to school- those after-school Kumon math and reading classes cost $225/mont per child.

 

Of course, there are plenty of dual-income families where both parents work closer to full-time and take home much more income, but those families are paying for childcare outside of school hours, which adds up fast. I'm also willing to bet that families in this situation pay for additional expenses such as convenience foods, etc., that we don't.

 

 

 

For me, I was a stay-at-home mom regardless of whether or not my kids were public educated, private educated, or home-schooled. So pulling my kids out of public school to homeschool them did not cost me any extra in wages; I hadn't planned on working while I had kids at home. I think there are many moms out there like me, too, although I guess our numbers are declining bit-by-bit.

[flyingiguana]

Given the amount of education that actually goes on at the schools near us, I think we're really paying for daycare, not schooling. Now one might argue that government funded daycare is a good use of taxes, but I think they should call it what it is, and perhaps only provide it free to those who need it.

 

There are teachers who are trying to teach, but they tend to burn out and leave. Or get kicked out. I don't have a lot of respect for the reality of the institution, but as the alternative might be a completely uneducated citizenry, I don't see where there's any choice.

 

Personally, I think the schools would get more education in if they cut the school day down to an hour or two -- reduce the class sizes accordingly and give the teachers several sets of students a day to work with. If that's what school was, we might have stuck with it with our kids, because what we wanted out of school was the education part. Not the daycare.

 

Around here, there are parents who will choose schools as far as possible from their homes. Then they can put the kids on a bus early in the morning and get them back late at night so as to avoid paying any childcare costs. If you work a minimum wage job, I suppose this is the only way to do it. Seems like a wacky allocation of resources though. If my tax dollars are going to go toward supporting these families, I'd rather the kids were in a quality program rather than sitting on a bus with little supervision and not much intellectual stimulation.

 

As far as what the bill is to each individual, remember to check into what state funds (mostly collected as income taxes) also go to the schools. But a disproportionate amount of that likely goes to rural districts which have higher per pupil operating costs due to transportation and the need to have services and personnel at every location, even if the school is not serving a large number of pupils.

[flyingiguana]

 

 

but my house is here and the lights are on whether I homeschool or not. My house is here and the lights are on whether I even have children or not. The bedrooms to sleep in and the flushing toilets are not homeschooling expenses.

 

 

But the costs of water and power are higher if you're home more.

 

Our neighbors water, electricity, and gas costs are quite a bit lower than ours, even with similar family sizes.

[TraceyS/FL]

We shall just agree to disagree. Like someone else said, we would have a home regardless of HSing.

 

The State of FL was willing to pay $7500 for my DD to go to private school for her special needs (but not provide transportation). I don't pay that much a year in taxes - so her 2 years in the system more than got me my tax moneys worth.

 

My youngest child is in PS, I had an issue and needed to speak with her guidance counselor the other day. Now, this child is having a crap year - she has a first year teacher (that does not have kids), and you can tell she is struggling to find her teaching groove. A child that has NEVER had issues academically is bring home Ds and Fs weekly.

 

I"m not at the school complaining - all I am doing is adding to my list of things I must RETEACH during the summer so she can go to 3rd grade.

 

When I mentioned to the counselor that I wasn't even going to complain about the crap math curriculum coupled with a first year teacher, she said to me, "Oh i'm so happy your realize that!"

 

When I said I was just adding to my list of things to homeschool her for over the summer, she again THANKED me for being able to do that.

 

THANKED ME for being able to FIX their mucked up school year. It is the first conversation we have had where she didn't try to convince me that they were better than homeschooling. Imagine that....

 

I'm pondering sending them the bill for the materials..... :glare:

[TraceyS/FL]

But the costs of water and power are higher if you're home more.

 

Our neighbors water, electricity, and gas costs are quite a bit lower than ours, even with similar family sizes.

In my house not that much more. WE use natural light during the day, they aren't on the TV all day, the thermostat keeps the house the same temp whether or not we are here, my kids don't use more water than they would if they were gone all day. A couple of extra flushes per child isn't going to make a huge difference in the water bill.

 

A friend of mine was skeptical on the water savings of a front loader - she bought one and ended up having a $75/month reduction in her bill. Perhaps your neighbors are just more thrifty? have more energy efficient appliances? It all factors in.

 

In my case, my electric bill is high - my boyfriend freaked yesterday when I told him how much, well, my house was built in 1973 and I have original single pane windows and need attic insulation at a minimum. I can't lower it anymore until those things are put in.

[boscopup]

For me, I was a stay-at-home mom regardless of whether or not my kids were public educated, private educated, or home-schooled. So pulling my kids out of public school to homeschool them did not cost me any extra in wages; I hadn't planned on working while I had kids at home. I think there are many moms out there like me, too, although I guess our numbers are declining bit-by-bit.

 

Same here! My oldest was in private school. I still stayed at home. I quit my job the day my water broke with my oldest. :tongue_smilie:

 

So in my case, no, lost wages didn't factor into cost of homeschooling, nor does extra utility usage.

 

We also had life insurance before we started homeschooling.

 

I don't have any problem paying for public schools, but I do wish they (and the government) would spend money wisely.

[Lucy the Valiant]

These things, largely due to ADA, are what caused education expenses to skyrocket. They were not part of public education in most areas even 30 years ago. IMO, many of these things should be coming out of a health care/medical budget, and not out of an education budget. Although I guess the taxpayers would be paying for them regardless. I think its easy to hide these things under the blanket of education, and it seems to me that the costs associated with these services are not readily and comfortably discussed. What does an equal and appropriate education really mean? Should there be limits, and what should those limits be? These are questions our country will have to grapple with in the near future, as education costs continue to skyrocket out of control.

 

Yes.

 

I think that schools should be accommodating to special needs; I absolutely do. My hesitations come when there is literally no spending cap at all on those special needs . . . it distorts the definition of "least restrictive environment" and "equal opportunity" dramatically.

 

I live in a relatively small town; last year our town was required by federal ADA mandates to spend > $600K on 6 children who moved into the town and required services after the budget had been made. One of those kiddos has visual impairment and attends a residential school out of state for around $130K / annually.

 

At some point, every single parent has to evaluate available resources and say, "Well, this is the very best we can do for this child." But in a real world, there are limits there, for every one. (Naturally those limits are much higher for some than for others.) My point of argument regarding ADA's provisions is that . . . there is simply no limit. If a $130,000 school is the "best match" for a child with visual impairment, off he goes.

 

But what happens for my child who does NOT have visual impairment, but would most certainly benefit from a $130,000 / year education budget?

 

I absolutely believe that every child in America should have a CHANCE to get a decent education. Unfortunately, due to zip code, many children are currently denied that chance and are 100% locked in to failing schools. I live in a "great" school system that posts 35% of 11th graders at or above math proficiency.

 

I don't think this is a simple issue at all, but - I definitely think it could benefit from some outside-the-box thinking. It is *always* easier to spend someone else's money than your own.

[TraceyS/FL]

 

Yes.

 

I think that schools should be accommodating to special needs; I absolutely do. My hesitations come when there is literally no spending cap at all on those special needs . . . it distorts the definition of "least restrictive environment" and "equal opportunity" dramatically.

My child wasn't learning like she should have in the restricted self-contained classroom they had her in. She needed one on one instruction. They kept at first trying to put her in a regular classroom - I wouldn't allow it, it wasn't fair to the rest of the kids in that class. It still wasn't going to be the best learning environment for her, and the hoops the teacher would have needed to go thru, plus the fact my DD would have needed an aide....

 

I forced the self-contained classroom, which saved them money. A LOT of money. And now that she is home again that money is free to go to someone else.

 

BUT, not all parents are like me and think about how their special needs child's right to an education impacts the rest of the class AND the bottom line.

 

:001_unsure:

[TraceyS/FL]

In one district in which I taught, they had a superintendent and three assistant superintendents, each of whom had staff. When cuts had to be made, the choice was between cutting Down to two asst superintendents, or cutting every single teacher's aide in the district. Not cutting hours--completely cutting the positions. Guess which got cut.

 

That is the kind if thing that makes me crazy.

 

Administrative bloat is a big money sink in a lot of school districts.

This is what bugs me the most.

 

Obviously they are not letting the parents have input on this.... of course, the assistant super probably had a strong job contract with the aides being left hung to dry.... so they were the "easiest" to get rid of. UGH.

 

 

The Superintendent here did come testify at my divorce trial - I figured I "paid her" for that with my taxes (she was my ex's expert witness). It was a darn shame she had no clue what she was testifying about regarding my kids being enrolled in a private school vs being "homeschoolers" in the county. She could have gotten some real work done that day ;)

[Lucy the Valiant]

Someone told me (I have not verified this myself but do trust the source) that in the state of New Hampshire, there used to be a provision that any group meeting a certain minimum number (10 families?) could collectively form their own SAU (school district). The "school part" of those 10 families' property taxes would ride on the heads of the kids - if the group opted out of federal funding (and therefore federal mandates), they were then free to meet anywhere that satisfied basic health / life / safety issues and organize their curriculum and teaching staff however they pleased (loosely / strictly / STEM-focused / voc-tech focused / whatever).

 

I thought that sounded like a really fair way to manage things; any family that DIDN'T want to be part of a smaller SAU would still be able to attend their own town's regular public school, but the tax-paying families who were not being served by the only public school in town still had options.

 

Didn't cost anyone anything, and opened a lot of doors.

[kristinannie]

72% of my property taxes go to the public schools in WV. So, that is about $2000 a year. I don't actually mind paying that since I CHOOSE to homeschool. That said, I do wish that my kids could do some things at the PS such as sports or art class or whatever, but they are not allowed to do anything unless they enroll full-time. Our schools are pretty bad here. The average student at the elementary school tests at 37% yet homeschoolers are required to hit 50% in each subject or else the state can give you a hard time. I was given a lot of grief by the state this year when I declared. They kept sending me letters saying, "If you have already enrolled your child in public school, please disregard this letter..." I think they get a lot of funding from the state and/or federal governments.

 

I have a lot of teacher friends and have never heard anyone say that they like the way the schools are run. The money is spent poorly and teachers are not given any leeway here to teach kids except to teach to the test. I think the schools are failing here. Kids are not taught to think at all. You cannot even really have a discussion with them. It is scary, especially when gifted high school child cannot do anything but parrot back facts you have given him.

 

I think the system is failing and needs to be fixed. I think we should get to do some things at school since we pay a lot for them. I think a lot of money is wasted. I think that decisions are made really high up by people who don't work in schools. I think there is a lot of pressure to enroll kids. I think it is mostly about cold hard cash. I would love to have a tax break for curricula.

 

BUT, I also don't think that most people have any other options than public school. Even though they are very much less than ideal, they at least give the kids a chance at becoming educated. Whether or not they take the opportunity is really up to them. So, I guess I don't mind paying into the system even though I choose not to take part in it. I also pay for prisons, a Congress that does nothing, wars I don't like, etc.