Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

View Article
03

The school board meeting the other night was packed with parents opposed to year round schools. One mother let the ‘chips fall where they may,’ put it bluntly and said “switching to year round schools would force her family to eschew the annual beach vacation.” (News and Observer; 9-26-06).


Now, there’s something about all this that’s troubling and it goes beyond just the issues of year round schools and billion dollar school bonds.


Think of it this way: The parents who are complaining have been receiving a blessing from the community (a free public education for their children) – but, now, they are turning around and saying that’s not good enough. Why? Because it interferes with their vacations.


Does this sound a little selfish?


In effect, these parents – to protect their vacations – want other people to pay a billion dollars more in taxes for new schools – while the schools we have now sit empty for 25% of the year. Does that really make common sense?


Maybe these parents should take a minute to consider what a blessing they really have: It would cost $10,000 a year to send a child to a private school. If, by comparison, the only price they pay for their children’s education is readjusting their beach vacation schedules – is that so terrible?


Click to Read & Post Comments

Comments

Posted in: General, Raleigh
Actions: E-mail | Permalink | RSS comment feed |

3 comments on “Year Round Schools

  1. jstegall says:

    Carter you’ve hit the nail on the head. It’s a question of priorities, and the lady you quoted has hers all backwards.

    What’s worse, if she would bother to take out a calander and look at it, I’ll bet she could easily find a few weeks during the ‘year-round’ school year to squeeze in a vacation–at the beach or anywhere else.

  2. mhinglis says:

    Mr. Wrenn,

    If you attending the school board hearing, I’m sure you heard many other compelling thoughtful reasons as to why MYR is a bad policy. But you chose to highlight the vacation argument. If you would do your homework you would realize that other districts in the nation have tried MYR to relieve overcrowding and in the hopes of saving money. These districts have returned to a traditional school calendar. They found that MYR was not the cost saving or overcrowding panacea they hoped it would be. Operating costs for YR schools are much higher than traditional school costs. I know it “fit” to portray those of us against MYR as whiny, selfish, rich, spoiled parents–(as has been done many times before), but perhaps you should look into the issue before spouting the pro bond, pro growth agenda. And by the way–our children are not getting a “free” education. As property owners we pay taxes that fund these schools and as such have a responsibility to insure that the funds are used wisely. MYR is a bad policy that will be disastrous for WCPSS.

  3. forced_yr_round says:

    There’s that “selfish” word again. When you vote, you’re being selfish, aren’t you?

    – Mandatory year-round has almost no history of success nationwide. California has been sued and must eliminate it.

    – Special needs kids AND academically gifted kids will both be negtively affected. You need many more teachers due to the multi-tracks to handle their needs.

    – People used to traditional schedules DO shy away from moving into a different school schedule. That affects property values.

    The bond is worded so that more mandatory year-round schools will be built. Count me in as a NO voter, and this issue will split up the family, with a spouse who teaches and kids with special needs. I don’t think ANY issue has ever made me so angry – it’s the word MANDATORY doing it.

    Selfish?

Copyright (c) Talking About Politics   :   Terms Of Use   :   Privacy Statement