Login | Member Center | Contact Us | Site Map | Archives | Alerts | Subscribe to the paper

HomeBlogsNo Issues Left Behind

« Are we ready to rumble? |  Main  | How do you say "stupid" in Austrian? »

September 20, 2005

Westlake vs. Westlake Story - WESTLAKE WINS!

In case you missed Sunday's Star Sports section, there was a huge article comparing the football programs of Westlake High School in Thousand Oaks, CA and Westlake High School in Austin, Texas.

There is an old adage in sports. When you're done comparing players, stats, coaches, fans etc.. there is really only one thing that matters at the end of the game - The scoreboard, and what it says the final score is.

You see, most people reading the article would have thought it was about football. But to me, the article was about priorities. Check out the tale of the tape:

The two Westlakes
September 18, 2005

Comparing Westlake High with Westlake of Austin, Texas:

WESTLAKE, Austin
Year opened: 1969.
Enrollment: 2,400, grades 9-12.
Principal: Kathleen Sullivan (first year)

Academics: 86 percent of seniors
(2003-04 attended four-year college;
statistics) average SAT score, 1,185;
national average, 1,026)

AP courses: 23 offered


WESTLAKE, Thousand Oaks

GENERAL INFORMATION
Year opened: 1978.
Enrollment: 2,168, grades 9-12.
Principal: Ron Lippari (sixth year)

Academics: 64 percent of seniors
(2003-04 attend four-year college;
statistics) average SAT score, 1,154;
national average 1,026

AP courses: 13 offered.

So the final score?

Westlake Austin has 86% of seniors going on to four-year college, vs. 64% for Westlake Thousand Oaks. Austin offers 23 AP classes instead of 13 for T.O. Average SAT scores are higher in Austin. And, lest we think it's a jock school down there, a smaller % of kids are participating in athletics in Austin vs. T.O. (33% to 41.5% in T.O.)

Speaking of scoreboards, check this out: Austin Westlake has a video scoreboard, and the video presentations are created by the high school graphics department for school credit, and it leads kids into good paying jobs during college later in life.

While this was a story comparing the two football programs, it was a very telling story about the depth and bench-strengths of the schools themselves.

So on your scoreboard, which Westlake wins?


Tim Keaney



Comments

Hi Tim:

I was in a conference in downtown LA all day, so I couldn't respond sooner.

Is the Westlake school located in Austin a private or public school?

I know that Texas does not have the property tax limitations we have in CA. Are you for or against prop 13? Do you think property taxes should be increased to pay for schools like they do in Texas?

Scott

Posted by: Scott Blough at September 20, 2005 08:35 PM

Westlake in Austin is a public school in the Eanes School district.

I have written plenty about prop 13. I think if you were to make any kind of adjustment to Prop 13 to increase revenues for school facilities or improvements, you'd have to mitigate that by eliminating taxes in other areas.

Example: Yes, Texas has higher property taxes, but it does not have a state income tax. It also has significantly lower small business taxes. This gives homeowners the ability to pay more in property taxes.

Combine that with lower property values, and you've got homeowners in Texas paying roughly equivalent taxes or less in Texas, for more (and more advanced) services.

California has some of the highest tax burden in the nation. High sales Tax, High State Income Tax and moderate property tax (RATES). But what is it delivering in services for the $113 billion?

Again - any exam of prop 13 must be in conjunction with an analysis of the tax burden vs. services provided.

It requires leadership Scott, and it requires imagination - and I don;t think we have much of either.

Tim

Posted by: Tim Keaney at September 20, 2005 08:43 PM

Tim:

I don't want to examine changes to prop 13 at all especially in the context of services provided or other tax methods.

Next thing I would know I'm paying 10-12% in property taxes and the state income tax decreases only marginally.

Property taxes are a punishment on the virtues of homeownership, plain and simple. Prop 13 is the only law that protects people's homes and I don't want to see that changed.

The real difference is a state income tax increase is only marginally felt and is paid throughout the year. If you removed prop 13 and allowed politicians to set the rate, you'd see big property tax bills coming around Christmas time and income tax season. Two times a year people would be shilling out 10-12K out of their property, which is not as liquid as an income tax.

For me, removing prop 13 is the equivalent of the recent supreme court case allowing for cities to eminent domain properties in the interest of economic development.

I would never support a change to prop 13.


Scott

Posted by: Scott Blough at September 21, 2005 11:31 AM

Scott,

I appreciate your comments, and given the current state of the legislature, where they approve gay marriage and dirvers licenses for illegals, while the south lay in ruins, you do have to question their ability to govern. Hence my comments about the lack of leadership.

At the same time though, I think you missed my point. The point of the triple taxation reference that California is under, is that it truly is an Axis of Evil. In other words, there is so much money going to the California treasury that pork and waste are the status quo, resulting in failed results.

In other, other words. We're ALREADY paying the money, but shouldn't Californians be up in arms about perforance? I don't think they are.

Usually we get what we pay for, but not in California's schools.

Tim

Posted by: Tim Keaney at September 21, 2005 11:49 AM

Tim:

In this morning's paper, Hollow Hills was awarded the Blue Ribbon award and it appears test scores are moving up throughout the state. When you say performance, what particularly are you pointing at.

I agree on the triple taxation comments. I believe in reducing property taxes, not increasing them.

I also would like to see the income tax to be oriented toward a local system. Here's how I think it should work. If you pay income taxes in Ventura County, your county gets a large percentage of your income back just as they do with the current sales tax.

This would force, less prosperous areas to seek job producing businesses as a top priority. It would move economic development to the top of the list. Secondarily, if cities and counties are dependent on income taxes as a revenue stream, they will pursue more business friendly strategies to attract more jobs and retain the ones they have.

I would also turn the city's business license fee into a flat fee instead of based on gross receipts. No business should be punished with more taxes because they made more money.

Lastly, I would seek to abolish the sales tax altogether. This is an exremely regressive taxation and punishes people for buying milk for their kids.

If the state, county, and city were strictly focused on income taxes as their source of income, they would create business environments much more friendly to the employed. They would also pursue businesses that have the potential of increasing wages.

We have seen a stagnation in wages in the last ten years and a focus on increasing wages would help.

Scott

Posted by: Scott Blough at September 21, 2005 12:35 PM

Scott,

When I talk performance, I talk about:

SAT Scores vs. National Average
% of kids going on to college, in particular 4 year college
High School API scores

Yes, the press is great at pointing out when an elementary school is increasing it's scores, and we should all celebrate that. But as kids are ramping towards college and career, statistics show their schools aren't.

I agree with most of what you said - but having everyone focus on income taxes vs. other forms of taxes is not a way to keep them low, as you want them.

Tim

Posted by: Tim Keaney at September 21, 2005 01:37 PM

Scott,

Here is another example - Yes, scores are increasing, but incrementally at best. While real reform, not the governors' or democrats, but REAL reform is not happening. Read this from the Sac Bee- Here is a highlight:

---

Meanwhile the gremlins in the Legislature are hard at work trying to weaken, defer and generally confuse the standards, tests and other accountability measures that, however flawed, have been the most important forces in getting schools to pay more attention to the state's underserved kids.

Nor have the California Teachers Association and its allies been exactly helpful. Getting better teachers and resources into high poverty and high minority schools is going to require far more flexibility in class size, working conditions and differential teacher pay than the CTA, still stuck in its industrial union model, has been willing to accept.

Read the article...

http://www.sacbee.com/content/politics/columns/schrag/story/13597956p-14438761c.html

Tim

Posted by: Tim Keaney at September 21, 2005 01:51 PM

Tim: I'm interested in where you got the data about students going on to four-year colleges. The number seems high. My ususal source for this kind of data is not available at the moment.

Jerre

Posted by: Jerre Reimers at September 21, 2005 02:04 PM

Jerre,

The Ventura County Star was the source for all statistics for the article. David Lassen Reporting. I did not independantly verify the numbers.

Tim

Posted by: Tim Keaney at September 21, 2005 02:07 PM

I want to say something about the SAT. SAT scores can be improved by taking SAT prep courses that usually cost more than what middle to low income kids can pay for.

We can definitely look at API as a measurement, but I'd caution that one can improve their scores drastically by taking expensive SAT courses like Kaplan.

I didn't do so well on my SAT's, but got a 4 year degree and a masters. SAT is a barrier to college entrance because of the costs involved with preparing for it.

Put in the context of increasing college tuition, I would say we are not on the right track of producing a large population of college grads prepared for the jobs and challenges of tomorrow.

Scott

Posted by: Scott Blough at September 22, 2005 08:49 AM

Scott,

Are you suggesting elimination of the SAT as a method of admission, or a de-emphasis of it? I think you are right that it is probably an excellent tool for lazy admissions people. What do you think of the new tools added to it, such as the essay?

T

Posted by: Tim Keaney at September 22, 2005 08:59 AM

Tim:

I'm saying that if the SAT is a prerequisite of admission, we need to make sure everyone who wants to go to college gets the prep training.

I think the SAT just blocks too many kids from getting into college that want to go. It should be used as one of many tools and not be the make or break test that basically determines long term educational success and opportunity for students.

The SAT cannot measure will to succeed and determination to succeed, yet it really defines who goes to the best schools and who doesn't.

Scott

Posted by: Scott Blough at September 22, 2005 10:32 AM
Post a comment






Remember personal info?






Sponsored Links