The Observation Deck

You know, if you think about it, Bill's "narrow argument" really isn't much more narrow than that of the other side.

Each one is trying to take a complex issue (income, parental involvement, salaries, benefits, property values, infrastructure, technology, busing, etc., etc. etc.) and tie them up into a simplistic argument.

Unless society is willing to take a complete, holistic look at the school issue, we're left with arguments that really don't persuade anyone....

"Teachers are overpaid!"

"My kid's teacher is the best, they deserve more money!"

"If the levy fails, property values will go down!"

"Teachers work 9 hour days even though we don't have to!"

"Think of the children!"

The real issue is that we're attempting to train 21st century children to live and produce in a 21st century world and still relying on teaching methods, facilities and compensation packages originally devised in the 1940's or before.

With as much divisiveness as has been occurring, perhaps it's time for a "clean sheet" approach to education?

Just a thought......we now return you to your regular bashing.

Charlie Page wrote:I suspect he throws number out here because most conservatives like the results of something to be measurable.

Unless it's scientific.

Charlie Page wrote:In order to gauge the performance of something, we conservatives use some kind of cost per whatever measure. There's also the cost vs benefit rule that says if the cost outweighs the benefit or perceived benefit you find a way to make it cost effective or come up with another alternative.

Conservatives do not have exclusive ownership of rational thought.

Charlie Page wrote:Just my two cents.

Is that inflation adjusted?



Steve

.

Bob, when was the last time you were in a classroom? Not just as a student but as an adult.

When I hear people state that we are using old teaching models I just have to question how much time they have spent recently in a classroom.

Now I am fairly young around here, although I've been out of high school for 18 and I feel old, but I can say that what is being taught and how it's being taught is quite a bit different from when I was in school. I wasn't around in the 40's so I can't say how different classrooms are now from then but I know the classroom of today and the classroom of the 80's are quite a bit different.

Technology has changed drastically and while there are some teachers that don't utilize technology to it's fullest at least here in Lakewood our classrooms use and amazing amount of technology. I know we have many teachers, young and more-mature that are constantly learning new ways to teach and interact with their students. Also our classrooms of today are set up quite a bit differently. Classrooms are smaller, teachers teach interactively instead of merely lecturing the students, kids are up moving around the classroom, they don't spend 6 hours a day sitting in a desk.

Our schools are not bubbles, they react to the world around them and they are constantly changing. Am I saying they are perfect? Absolutely not but I think when you make statements basically saying they are old and outdated you fail to give credence to all the amazing educators out there doing their best to bring new ideas and constantly changing education techniques to their classrooms.

And Bill, while we often disagree I know that you want children to get the best education possible and you want financial responsibility from the district. I thank you for getting us all to talk, discussion is a good thing.

Danielle,

I'll sidestep the "been in a classroom" question for now. I realize schools have changed and teaching methods have changed, but I think you'd also agree those are incremental changes rather than a "clean sheet" reinvention.

Maybe it's just the engineer in me, but I'm always curious if there's a more effective and efficient way to do anything. Sometimes there is, sometimes there isn't.

For all I know, the way things are done now may be the best way to do things. But seeing how much technology has taken over our lives over the past 15 years or so, it does make one wonder whether a room of 20-30 kids and one teacher the most effective way for modern kids to learn?

I'm not here to belittle or demean anyone or any institution, it just seems to me we need to better frame the debate if we actually think we're going to influence anyone besides ourselves.

Bob, I will admit I would love the clean sheet approach but I am also a realist and know that changes must come incrementally because that is how the world works. I love the ideas of year round school, same amount of days just divided out a bit. I also love the idea of alternative schools where the education model can be adjusted for the individual student. I love creativity and honestly I see a lot of creative teachers that are working within the confines of their specific districts.

I know that people want to be able to have tangible evidence that schools are working which is why unfortunately we rely so heavily on damn fricken test scores. And lets be honest while many people like you or me would be okay with saying "let's try something new" the vast majority of taxpayers would have a heart attack if the educational model of this country was changed drastically overnight.

So the only solution I can see is be involved and support teachers that are trying to think in new and fresh ideas. I can think of one that posts here from time to time, Sean Wheeler. I know he is doing his best to work within the rules but also to be innovative.

Sorry that's all I've got, like I said I'm a realist and I know that drastic changes won't come overnight.

Danielle,

I think we agree more than we disagree.

I think the frustration a lot of people who aren't in the educational business stems from what seems to be an ever-increasing cost per pupil. If we're saying we can't objectively measure performance and return on investment, we're left with voting for levies on faith.

Increases in expenditure can't keep outstripping inflation and be sustainable. Sooner or later the piper has to be paid.

Actually, there's a whole bunch of "clean-sheet" type of stuff going on in education right now, that gets well away from the traditional classroom models. More and more, both public and private online computer-related classes are coming into play, with many field trips and social experiences being coordinated online as well. While many, if not most parents, may still choose the traditional public or private classroom experience for their children, those non-traditional educational alternatives are coming on the scene like wildfire.

As far as educational costs are concerned, remember too, that there are many increased costs in public education, ranging from charter and private schools receiving public funds, to the numerous un- and under-funded governmental mandates that continue to arrive at the public school's doorways.

The biggest change IMHO that needs to occur in American education is the change to year-round school. We no longer live in a 19th-century agrarian society where the children need to be home during the growing season to sow the crops and tend the fields.

More than enough studies show that year-round education is both more productive and produces better results and yet it fails to be adopted and I honestly wonder why that is? Most of the developed world has already moved in that direction and their educational achievement is quickly surpassing the United States.

It doesn't even necessarily mean that there's more days of school in a year, just that the 3 to 4 month break in the summer is removed since that's the time that tends to represent the biggest slide backward in educational achievement.

Bob, yes I am certain that we probably do agree on quite a bit regarding education. I still though doubt that most people would be okay with a school model that looks drastically different than what they were educated in. I guess I just don't have that much faith in the general population, most people seem to like tried and true techniques even after they've been shown to be less effective.

And Brian I am the product of a year round school system in southern California and am therefore a major proponent of year round schooling. It works. Kids retain more information and require less reteaching. For that reason alone I would like to see more disctricts switch over to year round schooling. It's really a easy model to get used to. I remember growing up that my summer breaks never seemed to drag, we had a nice long break enough time to vacation and go stay with our grandparents but not so long as to be bored to death. I think though once again it's something different and many people aren't even willing to put much thought into a major change like that.

Bryan said:

that's the time that tends to represent the biggest slide backward in educational achievement.

actually, I viewed summer as a time of refreshment, an emptying out of my mind to make way for all the new glorious facts and theories that I would be presented with in the new school year

Cleveland Heights students get a pretty bad educationat a cost of $16,000 per year. If the cost was reduced to $8,000 per year would it be any worse?

Would it be better for Cleveland Heights to offer a bad education at $8,000 per year and spend the $40 million dollars saved on economic development?

What if Cleveland Heights and Shaker Heights reduced the cost to $8,000 per year and took the $80 million per year saved and invested it in a 10 year $800 million dollar program to:

Entice industry to relocate to their cities?
To lower taxes and let people keep more of their own money?
Or
Just put the money saved into a bank account for each student and at graduation give each a check for $150,000?

Of course they won't do any of those things so I'm left wondering:

What do they think they are buying for that $800 million?

Hey--- I want one of those Bill Call calculators, let's see

take $8,000
hit Enter
punch a couple of random and arbitrary buttons
hit Enter
And**************

BINGO JACKPOT

$800,000,000 friggin million buckaroos!!!!!!!

I'm gonna take this little calculator over to my bank teller right away----my ship has come in

Stan Austin wrote::wink: Hey--- I want one of those Bill Call calculators, let's see

take $8,000
hit Enter
punch a couple of random and arbitrary buttons
hit Enter
And**************

BINGO JACKPOT

$800,000,000 friggin million buckaroos!!!!!!!

I'm gonna take this little calculator over to my bank teller right away----my ship has come in

Enrollment

Cleveland Heights 5,932
Shaker Heights 5,387
Total 11,339
Total spent per student:
Cleveland Heights 16,037
Shaker Heights 16,194

Average 16,115

Amount spent in Avon 8,000

Difference 8,115
times number of students 11,339
Equals $92 million per year more spent in Cleveland heights and Shaker heights on a per student basis.

Assuming no inflation and no raises and no increases in health insurance or pension costs the extra money spent over a ten year period equals $920 million.

CH and SH get very poor results for all of that extra money. I'm just arguing that the education provided could be just as bad for $8,000 per student.

If CH and SH had $1 BILLION dollars to spend over the next 10 years is there a better way to spend it than well paid janitors and early retirement for teachers?

Not everyone is meant to be a scholar,
most college degrees provide no value added in the job market,
not everyone belongs in high school,
not everyone should have a college degree.

What if that $1 billion was spent on new industry, business infrastructure or simply given back to the peole who earned it?

Of course that begs the question:

If CH and SH had bad schools that spent $8,000 per student and you decided to invest $1 billion in education over a ten year period wouldn't you expect SOME result? Of course what is usually meant by investing in education is bigger salaries, fewer hours worked and earlier retirement.

Bill,
Your biggest fallacy in your entire argument you just laid out is that you're assuming the education would be the same if they only spent $8000. How can you do that?

I can assume I'm going to start getting tax returns of $1 million and I'm now rich, it doesn't make it so.

Bill Call wrote:Not everyone is meant to be a scholar,
most college degrees provide no value added in the job market,
not everyone belongs in high school,
not everyone should have a college degree.

I've heard that residents of Afghanistan have the equivalent of a Second Grade education.

Bill Call wrote:What if that $1 billion was spent on new industry, business infrastructure or simply given back to the peole who earned it?

My guess is that those with with no vocational/career training, or any education opportunities, will be climbing in your windows at night to get a little share of that $1 billion.

.