Report Inappropriate Comments

Indeed, with government-run education, medical care, social services, etc. it always, always comes back to "...we're underfunded." In my decades of observing the Warwick public schools, I have yet to hear a superintendent or principal say: "Thank you, taxpayers. We have enough money." Nope, it's never, ever enough. And the notion that more spending will result in more parents seeking to educate their children in the Warwick public schools is laughable. The city presently spends about $18,000 per pupil for very mediocre results. Perhaps Mr. D'Agostino should consult the geniuses in Cambridge, MA where $27,000 per pupil is spent for even more deplorable measurable outcomes. Or Central Falls at $22k. Better yet, let's look at Acton-Boxborough Regional (MA), which spends $13,600 per student and is recognized as one of the best public high schools in New England year after year. The fact is that expenditures and outcomes are virtually unrelated. Warwick's enrollment continues to decline, not "...because of the lack of funding", but rather because of a dearth of economic opportunities in the state for educated parents. The state retains the honor of having the second lowest level of median adult education in New England. Tens of thousands of educated families have already left, leaving a shrinking economic pie. And highly educated parents that do remain are desperately seeking alternatives to a school system that still can't seem to find a 'consultant' to tell them what to do after a seven month search. Hell, they still haven't figured out what questions to ask the consultant. Perhaps most telling is the fact that private and parochial schools are being inundated with admissions requests from parents who are also public school teachers. Hmmm.