Robyn- Thanks for the tip! I do structure my class in that way, but alas, students just don't come. For many in South OC it's not their financial loss if they fail the course. Both you and Dominic have some great points on both sides of the issue!

I too have really enjoyed the issues you two have brought up on this topic! I'm always up for an intellectual discussion on any topic, but when it's about real estate and education, I'm hooked!

Sheila,

I think that the unmotived students will just not enroll if the costs were more. I would suggest stucturing the class such that it would really hurt the grade if the lectures were missed, but then they would choose to take another instructor. Either way, the hard instuctor would be out of a job. I don't have a solution. In my case, I would never dream of using my father's money for school and not taking advantage of the opportunity. He grew up in a poor family during the depression and knew the value of money. Maybe we should get back to our roots. I have always promoted education at home, but also told my children that if they were not interested in their future, why should I be. May be harsh, but the kids have to feel that the ball is in their court.

Dominic,

It is great that the funding can come to a vote and the needs of the majority are served. In Calif., all children are entitled to a free education. I don't feel the obligation to pay more than my share for that same education. My theory on what creates good schools is that motived parents will cluster at schools that have good reputations. Based on this theory, the school would not have to be even great. It would just have to be better than those in the nearby areas. My children's schools are just average and there are a lot of poor families in our district. My family and others are motivate and our children are at the top of their class. I did not pay a premium for living in a good district, so I guess I have nothing to lose. I would have suggested the doctor put his money in supplmenting his children's education with extra lessons or trips. That would be a more hands- on approach

I normally do not post comments, but I have really enjoyed this exchange. My youngest is finishing high school and I guess I have gathered up a lot of theories on what makes successful children. This subject is very interesting to me. I see many other parents in the groups that I voluteer in. Some of them are clueless about what their goals for their childrean should be, such as, hardworking, honest, and responsible. You can't throw money at that problem.

Robyn,
I am happy to assist those in need. And I agree with you about your comment about a lack of motivation by parents and children being more of a problem than money, especially in inner-city school districts. My point is that the parents who have an ability to pay should actually feel obligated to pay. I would be embarrassed to take a hand-out from the government if I were them. I guess this one touched a chord with me because I remember a conversation with a relative of mine a few years back. He had 3 children in public schools and he was whining about a tax proposal for the schools that was in danger of not passing. He couldn't believe that the "public" night not vote to fund more for his kids education. He is a doctor. I was stunned that he was expecting those in his area that were barely making it to fund the education of his kids. This was in an area near Akron, Ohio where many people are just getting by. I suggested that maybe he and the other parents who were high-income earners should contribute. He looked at he stunned like a deer in headlights!
Anyway, the point was to find a way to maintain a high level of education so that property values do not suffer. If it could be done without charging parent and without raising taxes or raiding funds from other programs, of course I'd be happy for that.

Robyn- I can see where you coming from in a lot of ways. By no means am I saying that money is the total answer. But if a student/parent spends $300 on a class or $90, there's going to be some more motivation on both parts (the parent to keep the student motivated and vice versa) to attend, etc. It's a simple loss issue. In the same way I saw a lot of students who were on scholarships when I taught in an inner-city high needs program who literally would say, "Tell me what I need to get the C to keep getting my scholarship money and I'll do it". There are so many variables in education, I think money is one component of it.

Thanks for your thoughts!

Charging more does not make kids more dedicated. When Community College cost only a $5 health fee and books, I was there every class. Young people are unmotived because they are comfortable. If their parents took away the safety net and their future seemed uncertain, they would be more careful with their opportunities.

Regarding Dominic's comment, I totally disagree with your proposal. Our public school system has lived through a lot of down cycles, they will just have to cut back. I have never minded paying for public education. These children will be contributing to our society someday. Money is not the biggest problem in education. I feal it is lack of motivation on the part of the family and the child.

That is an interesting thought! As mentioned before, I'm an educator - I actually teach college. One thing I've noticed here about the college system (which is different than what you're proposing) is the cost of college vs. the value. In the midwest courses cost so much more and the students recognize that and put more effort into it. In California the cost of community college courses/tuition is so cheap ($90 for a 3 unit course for residents) that there's very little value. Kids will miss a week to go skiing and never show up again. It's pretty disruptive. But there is something about cost/value. Thanks for your thoughts Dominic!

It is amazing that nobody ever proposes a solution where parents actually take resposibility for the education of their own children and come up with a tuition-based contribution. How inovative! Parents actually contributing for the education of their kids... Until we get real education reform similar to the foodstamp system where only families that actually need help get it, school quality will continue to decline. Government programs usually decay to the minimum acceptable level and govt. education is no exception. It is absurd that poorer families who may not have kids are subsidising through taxation the well-off families with kids with a government handout. Just think, if every family of means with children in school actually contributed a nominal amount to the education of their own children, voila, the budget problem is solved without new taxes on the rest of society. Of course I am sure those who have been getting the free ride won't like the idea very much. Personal resonsibility doesn't seem to mean much anymore, hence the subprime loan situation, so no surprises here.