The Observation Deck

Joan:

Here, here, I second Kate. You are intelligent, logical, perceptive and can turn a phrase. I see brainpower and capacity for some terrific work. The connection between community pride, the rules of the game, and scoring is very interesting.

The Lakewood Observer is not a killer, not compulsive about deadlines. We understand people have lives. 1000 words in 60 days. How about it?

Kenneth Warren

When the congress established the Department of Education the teachers unions and the school bureaucracy we ecstatic. They thought there would be a river of money with no strings. The reality is they got all the strings (the no child left behind act) and not money. How much money does the Lakewood school district get from the federal government. None.

If you want to reform education eliminate the Department of Education. The federal government has no role in education. If you insist on a Federal role in education then don't complain when they want to control the schools.

Bill Call wrote:How much money does the Lakewood school district get from the federal government. None.
.

Not true. Lakewood receives about 3 1./2 million a year or about 5% of its budget from the federal government. Most of this is tied to title programs for the economically disadvantaged or the "IDEA" program for students with students with special needs.
Not very much, but not nothing, either.

Mr Call

I suspected you would implicate the "unions" in this discussion.

You railed against the automaker's unions and I suspect your article on the fireman's overtime will focus on the union.

Unfortunately, I will have a difficult time ascertaining your impartiality after your postings here. You seem to have an agenda.

Not true. Lakewood receives about 3 1./2 million a year or about 5% of its budget from the federal government.

I should have been clearer in my writing.

Much of the opposition to federal involvement in education revolves around unfunded mandates. If the feds mandate programs and procedures that can reasonably be expected to cost ten million dollars but only provides three million dollars in funding then in my mind the feds have given us nothing.

In the above example I suppose the more accurate statement would be that the federal government has taken seven million dollars.

If I took five twenty dollars bills out of your wallet and then slipped a five dollar bill in your pocket how much money did I give you?

Grace O'Malley wrote:Mr Call

I suspected you would implicate the "unions" in this discussion.

You railed against the automakers unions and I suspect your article on the fireman's overtime will focus on the union.

Unfortunately, I will have a difficult time ascertaining your impartiality after your postings here. You seem to have an agenda.

It is simply a fact that the National Education Association was a big supporter of the Department of Education. Without that support it would not exist.

My post on GM mentioned both the unions and management. I can't think of any way to discuss the problems of GM without mentioning unions and management.

The fire department article is a fact based article. At this time the word union is not mentioned.

While many people have provided opinions and information for the article I am still listening. If you would like to contribute something to the article please send me a private message or post something on the board.

MERRY CHRISTMAS!!!!!!!

Mr. Call.

I'm going to play a bit of the devil's advocate with you, because although I disagree with some of what you say, there is much food for thought in your comments.
Public officials will always cry "Unfunded Mandate!" whenever a higher level of government catches them not doing their job. Environmental protection, public defenders, etc. have all been labelled as "unfunded mandates."
And so it is with IDEA and to a certain extent, NCLB. Local districts and states should have been funding education for children with disabilities ALL ALONG. It may be cost-ineffective, but its THE RIGHT THING TO DO. Likewise, why should success in teaching kids to read and do math be such a horrible imposition on schools that it can't be accomplished without turning on the federal taps?

But paradoxically, perhaps, I disagree that the federal government should have no role in controlling or f funding public education. In our "globalized" age, nations competing with us for economic dominance are guiding and funding their own schools at the national level. If it comes down to China vs. Kansas, who would YOU bet on?

Joan Roberts wrote:Mr. Call.


But paradoxically, perhaps, I disagree that the federal government should have no role in controlling or f funding public education. In our "globalized" age, nations competing with us for economic dominance are guiding and funding their own schools at the national level. If it comes down to China vs. Kansas, who would YOU bet on?

Joan:

I would bet on China, maybe.

The United States is beating Europe economically because we have a more creative, competitive system that destroys and creates businesses at a rapid rate.

The United States may lose to China because they MAY be able create a new capitalist model. I say MAY because 20 years ago everyone was predicting that Japan would outperform the U. S. Ten years ago everyone was predicting the European Union would outperform the US. Neither happened.

You make a good point regarding accountability. I think teachers long for the days when kids could graduate from High School without being able to read their diplomas. In today's PD there is an article that states more college students need remedial education. Why is that? I don't blame the teacher. I had good and bad teachers who had to deal with me, a bad student.

The Lakewood School District spends $200,000 to maintain a classroom. Is that not enough money?

Mr. Call.

Your $200,000 per classroom figure needs some context.
I spent $200 in New York recently for a hotel room. $200 for 15 hours in a 15 X 15 box sounds like a lot, until you realize that NY hotels can easily run twice or even three times as much.
The Lakewood classroom is pretty much the same price as other districts in the area, and the reasons for that are not simplistic or easily boiled down into a forum post.
Your posts, and mine as well, reflect the paradoxes and conundrums of trying to figure out education in America. We have both posted views that seem conflicting. In the meantime, I'm buying mutual funds that focus on the Pacific Rim, NOT real estate in Wichita.

Bill Call wrote: I think teachers long for the days when kids could graduate from High School without being able to read their diplomas.

What gives you the impression that any teacher ever longed for illiteracy?

Is this just a "feeling" or do you have anything concrete upon which you can back up this "thought"?

dl meckes wrote:

Bill Call wrote: I think teachers long for the days when kids could graduate from High School without being able to read their diplomas.

What gives you the impression that any teacher ever longed for illiteracy?

Is this just a "feeling" or do you have anything concrete upon which you can back up this "thought"?

It's not illiteracy they long for. It's a system where outcomes are not measured. We are spending more on primary and secondary education than ever. Are our schools better than ever?

Bill Call wrote:

dl meckes wrote:

Bill Call wrote: I think teachers long for the days when kids could graduate from High School without being able to read their diplomas.

What gives you the impression that any teacher ever longed for illiteracy?

Is this just a "feeling" or do you have anything concrete upon which you can back up this "thought"?

It's not illiteracy they long for. It's a system where outcomes are not measured. We are spending more on primary and secondary education than ever. Are our schools better than ever?

I think you are confusing several issues.

Are teachers, in fact, opposed to measurable outcomes?
How are "measurable outcomes" decided upon?
Does it take more time to teach some students than others?
Is there one teaching style that fits all teachers or students?

What costs are driving the expenditures?
What parts of the cost of education are out of line?
Are the costs of textbooks and learning materials rising at a high rate?

It's easy to make broad statements.

Things get far murkier when critical thought is applied and the entire issue is examined.

dl meckes wrote:

Bill Call wrote:

dl meckes wrote:

Bill Call wrote: I think teachers long for the days when kids could graduate from High School without being able to read their diplomas.

What gives you the impression that any teacher ever longed for illiteracy?

Is this just a "feeling" or do you have anything concrete upon which you can back up this "thought"?

It's not illiteracy they long for. It's a system where outcomes are not measured. We are spending more on primary and secondary education than ever. Are our schools better than ever?

I think you are confusing several issues.

Are teachers, in fact, opposed to measurable outcomes?
How are "measurable outcomes" decided upon?
Does it take more time to teach some students than others?
Is there one teaching style that fits all teachers or students?

What costs are driving the expenditures?
What parts of the cost of education are out of line?
Are the costs of textbooks and learning materials rising at a high rate?

It's easy to make broad statements.

Things get far murkier when critical thought is applied and the entire issue is examined.

According to the most recent five year projection:

Salaries and benefits will increase from $54,303,953 to $64.652,753, an increase of 19%.

Supply and material expenditures will increase from$2,145,466 to $2,322,322, an increase of 8%.

The district is anticipating a small decline in the number of students.

Supply and material expenses account for about 3% of total expenses. Salaries and benefits take up most of the rest.

Currently there are about 333 different pay scales for teachers. A first grade teacher with 18 years experience can cost the district between $67,000 and $95,000 per year depending on the level of education.

Here is food for thought:

Are there good and bad districts or only good and bad students?

If a students performance is related more to innate ability and parental involvement what can a teacher do to make a difference? It's hard to believe that a good teacher makes little difference but what if it's true? We need to ask hard questions. Of course we are talking in an echo chamber so it's mostly mental exercise.

Is a 1st grade teacher that costs $67,000 per year a better teacher than a teacher who costs $95,000 per year or worse? Or is their ability unrelated to pay?

If a $95,000 per year teacher is given a 10% raise is the teacher 10% better?

If you transferred all the teachers from Bay Village to Cleveland Schools would those schools improve?

If you transferred all the teachers from Cleveland schools to Bay Village would those school get worse?

Which teacher has an easier job?

The Lakewood Catholic Academy has costs of about $4,500 per student. Lakewood City schools spend about $10,000 per student. Which is the better system? If cost is the controlling factor then LCA should be a very poor school.

If I gave you $200,000 per year and told you to provide an education to 20 average students how would you spend the money? How about if those students were worse than average? Better than average?

How about:

Teacher: $80,000 pay and benefits

Full time aide: $35,000 pay and benefits

Utilities and rent for 1,000 square feet of space: $24,000

New books every 3 years: $5,000

Breakfast and Lunch: $36,000

One free trip to Europe every summer: Priceless

How would you spend the money?

One more thing: Home schooled students generally perform better than traditional students. Why is that? Or do they really perform better?

Check out a book called Freakonomics for an interesting look at economic theory applied to schools.

The recent posturing on NCLB has a tiny bit of whininess to it, but I still have to point out a basic fact that the "master of logic" didn't catch.
After fve years of non-improvement, NCLB calls for the state to step in and basically run laggard districts. If states somehow the talent and the answers to pull this off, WHY WAIT FIVE YEARS? Shouldn't they be sharing some of this expertise NOW? Wouldn't a "consultancy" (for want of a better word) now be a more positive way to deal with non-performing districts than the threat of a "nuclear option" in five years?

As to Mr. Call. Your numbers are all extreme examples of what the system MIGHT provide. There aren't a lot of first-grade teachers with doctorates, and I would challenge you to identify a first grade teacher with a compensation package of $95,000.. The 333 pay levels you cite are incongruous given that there are slightly more than 400 teachers in the entire district.
Furthermore, comparisons to private schools like Lakewood Catholic Academy are easy to dispute, because LCA has no special ed programs, and in fact, legally can lean on PUBLIC schools for support of special needs students. Let's stick to the "facts on the ground" and maybe we can get a clearer picture of where we are are where we need to go.

Joan has stated;

Furthermore, comparisons to private schools like Lakewood Catholic Academy are easy to dispute, because LCA has no special ed programs, and in fact, legally can lean on PUBLIC schools for support of special needs students

Indeed....Lakewood not only finds itself providing IEP students with specialized help from various private and charter schools but also from surrounding public school districts. There is also the duty to provide services to "13th year" seniors, such as living and job skills training, even after they may have graduated from other institutions.

Jeff