The Observation Deck

Mr. III, please read my post more carefully. I did not say that the Lakewood teachers don't care about their students. I did say that the union officials, in their capacity as labor bosses, care about their members more than they care about the students. I've talked privately with good Lakewood teachers who are unhappy with some of the union actions that have been taken, but they are in a position where they cannot speak publicly out of fear of union retribution.

I don't think a residency requirement is good for any type of government worker, as it eliminates a lot of talent from the pool. Residency requirements seem to me like inbreeding, and leads to people who strive for residency rather than for excellence in their field.

I agree fully with your argument that prospective teachers should complete their majors in regular classes, and that the colleges of education should offer only courses in teaching. I have admitted before that in getting my first degree I transferred from the College of Arts and Sciences into the College of Education because the College of Education offered courses in English, for example, that were far easier than those courses in the College of Arts and Sciences, so I had more time to party, and would still get a sheepskin.

My discourse on the GI bill was relative, as it showed how vouchers can work if the government is willing to put some effort into insuring that all schools at which vouchers are used meet some level of educational achievement.

As to computers, I think that many people, perhaps including you, underestimate the ability of children. My kids were learning algebra at home from a primitive program while attending elementary school, and that was before a lot of the advances in computers. My oldest grandchild starts kindergarten this Fall, but is already capable of a surprising level of performance on a pc. In all honesty, the 32 kindergartners in your example are obviously not getting a lot of teacher interaction; that is too many kids for a teacher, even with an aide, to handle effectively, unless there is something like a compupter to keep most of them busy.

I would rather have my child in a class working on a computer while the teacher supervises and handles discipline and toiletting, than sitting there doing nothing while the bad apples dominate the teacher's time.

Frankly, I don't understand the closing of your posting'; it seems to be a stew of invented facts and emotional reaction.

Will,

Thanks for the feedback. Yes, I find this issue to be quite disconcerting and I often wonder how some folks can just touch-on/muddle through this particular issue with less passion than that shown what I refer to as the Great 3-D (Dumb Dog Debate). If all politics is local, then whomever came up with the dog ban just to muddy the waters, thereby preventing other city issues from being debated and dissected with more clarity, they should have the open-air dog impound built next to them. I invent nothing in my diatribes; I do, however, vaguely generalize occasionally in summation, so please allow me this personal foible.

Getting down to brass tacks, however, your earlier post did mention "unions have little concern for the welfare of students," and being the egalitarian I am, ridiculously assumed that you were referring to the whole local union. Thanks for the clarification. At what level of the union (national, state, local) do you consider this base, self-serving attitude to be most prevalent? And I am not so sure about what form "union retribution" make take in Lakewood in 2008. It surely can't impact tenure, building assignments, service time (all administered by the Board). Maybe it takes the form of ostracization, where the culprit is left to themselves on one side of the teachers' lounge, while the rest of the teaching proletariat toe the party line on the other!

To touch on my suggestion of a teacher residency requirement, I think, given the requirements to teach and the district's track-record of not hiring many alums/residents, new hires are more likely than not to come from elsewhere, and what pool of potential new neighbors would get people in Lakewood more excited? I've met many Lakewood teachers, however, who do not want to live in Lakewood for a variety of reasons; some social, some personal, all understandable.

The kindergartner example is very accurate; some Lakewood schools, due to the NCLB and open enrollment, have K-classes with over 30 students. Perhaps Mr. Markling could touch-on some the district's policies on enrollment deadlines, staffing levels, the student residency verification process, etc., that would have a more direct impact on these class sizes. Moving staff from building to building the first 3 days of the school year has probably posed some issues for each school's faculty, staff and administration.

Finally, about the ability of children and how they interact with machines. I work in the IT industry, and I can truly sympathize with the heroic efforts of the LCS' IT support staff. They do what they do seamlessly from an admin. standpoint, and present it transparently to, what should be described as the most difficult end-user to support, the student.

My own kids are still too young to be using machines, but, again, Will, you have to consider the least-common denominator/access-deprived user in formulating a technology plan for an entire district. What percentage of K-5 kids in Lakewood 1) have supervised/tutored access to machines at home, that 2) are running reliably and don't have adware/spyware/viral infections and 3) have spent enough creative time on them and know enough to not be an additional distraction to the teacher, class and lesson? God bless your son (Go Lords!) and how he's raised your grandchild, but let's for argument's sake, admit that you're/they're the exception to the rule. Technology's great, but not the be-all, end-all solution to wiping the floor with the Japanese. We've been adding more and more technology to the education equation for years and haven't been getting the same results those IT integrators sold us on yet.

Personally, I don't consider it to be the boon many powers-that-be make it out to be. "And here we have the machine that goes BING!!!" Done right, you're correct in arguing that it can bridge some of the tremendous gaps found in learning languages, math, science, personal creativity. Done wrong, it can amount to enormous wasted District resources in the form of money, manpower, and ultimately, lost levy renewals. Secretly, though, I would like to see how "A Laptop for Every Lakewood Kid" would play-out. They'd have to be Macs, though. Photoshop on a PC is a crime.

I just wanted to touch on the subject of technology in our schools. I certainly do not think children should only be taught on computers with minimal teacher support like Will had suggested. But I do think they should be able to use technology on a daily basis as part of their education. And that is yet another reason why Lakewood is a great district. All the children have access to computers in their individual classrooms and they have computer access through the computer labs. The new schools have promethean (smart) boards as well as some of the buildings that haven't been remodeled yet. I know my 9 year old and I were watching the news the other night and he said smart boards are so cool. It hadn't even dawned on me that the technology that news stations use are the same as some of the schools. The kids also use technology daily to do daily announcements. So I think Lakewood is doing a good job, they have found that balance of having awesome technology and also have wonderful teachers that can also teach the kids hands on because students need both to be successful in the real world.

William Fraunfelder III wrote:Perhaps Mr. Markling could touch-on some the district's policies on enrollment deadlines, staffing levels, the student residency verification process, etc., that would have a more direct impact on these class sizes.

William,

Overall residency forms and guidelines can be found on the LCS website or by clicking here.

All policies can also be viewed on the LCS website or by clicking here.

Anyone with a specific staffing level question should feel free to contact Dr. Estrop directly. You can access his directory information by clicking here.

Matt

Mr. Markling,

I appreciate the links to access general information, but I was hoping for more of a personal perspective, in so much that we could put that sig file of yours to use, i.e. tell us what you've come across. This is a discussion board, not merely a repository of chat links. Does the LCS district track-down Cleveland students migrating in? I know it occurs - what's your take? Or do I actually have to come to a meeting and make it a matter of public record?

William,

While I don't remember the specifics I do know that at a board meeting last school year the topic of out of district students did come up. So they are aware and making attempts to find those students. And as a parent I would recommend coming to some board meetings, it's a good way to stay on top of information and at the end of the meetings members of the public are allowed to speak.

William Fraunfelder III wrote:Mr. Markling,

I appreciate the links to access general information, but I was hoping for more of a personal perspective, in so much that we could put that sig file of yours to use, i.e. tell us what you've come across. This is a discussion board, not merely a repository of chat links. Does the LCS district track-down Cleveland students migrating in? I know it occurs - what's your take? Or do I actually have to come to a meeting and make it a matter of public record?

William,

The LCS welcomes any and all students who are legal residents and/or permitted to attend the LCS under R.C. 3313.64 and other related laws. Enrollment details are in the links that I referenced in the above post. See, e.g., Board Policy 5111.

The LCS does not permit or tolerate anyone enrolling a student in violation of state law, and will address the matter accordingly. If you know of someone who is improperly enrolled in the LCS, please contact Dr. Estrop immediately.

I encourage you to come to any and all school board meetings. I also encourage you to make any and all of your concerns a matter of public record.

Matt

Danielle Masters wrote:And as a parent I would recommend coming to some board meetings, it's a good way to stay on top of information and at the end of the meetings members of the public are allowed to speak.

Danielle,

I agree. And it is important for board members to have as much face-to-face communication with parents as possible. Your board meeting comments and attendance are greatly appreciated.

Matt

Mr. Markling, thanks again for your insight!

I have to admit that I feel a little sympathy for parents who sneak their kids into a better school system. The cases I have read about involve people sneaking out of the Cleveland schools, not into them, and I think that practically speaking, that is their only option, since they can't afford private schools, and the Cleveland system (which at one time was considered an excellent system, at least if you were white) has deteriorated to the point where there is nothing parents can to to improve it.

I know what those parents are doing is illegal, and if they sneak into Lakewood it imposes an additional cost on Lakewood taxpayers, but I think a better solution would lie around having the state give those parents vouchers that would cover Lakewood's cost of the extra students. I'm not saying we should turn a profit on the deal, but at the same time one of the difficulties in running a school district is the constant change in the number of students. The best they have in terms of planning is a guess as to birth rates, and gain or loss of student population. So what do you do if you have enough students this year to warrant 10 kindergarten teachers, but you guess that in two years you will only have enough to warrant 6, and that in four years you will again have enough to warrant 10, or even 12. Do you fire two teachers at the end of the year, and tell them to come back in a couple more years. You can unplug, or even sell, a computer (yes, I'm still pushing that idea), but you can't treat a person that way, at least if you want any loyalty from them. If we accepted students from outside Lakewood, with the cost covered by vouchers, it would be easier to maintain a constant level of students, and thus teachers (or computers).

I think one of the advantages of the Lakewood system is that it is larger than most of the other suburban systems, and this size enables us to offer a wider curriculum, which means more opportunity for our students.

I don't know what form union retribution would take. I know the labor movement has a history of violence (and management shares in this), but I don't really see a militant union-supporting second grade teacher breaking the arms of a union critic. But there are less violent methods of retribution; perhaps breaking a few pencils and keying a car?

As to teachers who don't want to live in Lakewood, perhaps its just that they want the bigger yards and newer homes and infrastructure that make other people choose to live in other areas.

I can recall students who were unsympathetic to their fellow students who had a parent on the faculty. I think the feeling was that the teacher's child would always have an edge, even in classes taught by other teachers, as no teacher at the school would want to risk bad relations with another teacher by giving less than a good grade to that teacher's child. I'm not saying the collusion actually occurred, but that the students felt it would occur, and calls of "teacher's pet" were not uncommon.

When I taught, I didn't have children in school, but I was active in amateur hockey programs when my children were participating, and as a coach, I felt I had to go out of my way to show that I was not favoring my own child. Not all coaches felt this way, but that is the way I was raised. I explained this to my kids, but I'm not sure they appreciated my appearing to give breaks to other kids, rather than to them. It would have been better, I think, to have them on other teams. And I can understand how a teacher would have similar feelings about having their children attending the school system where they work.

Will Brown wrote:
I think one of the advantages of the Lakewood system is that it is larger than most of the other suburban systems, and this size enables us to offer a wider curriculum, which means more opportunity for our students.

Unfortunately this is no longer the case. With under 6000 students Lakewod is now at best a larger middle-sized district. The course offerings are comparable to what mey be fouind in neighboring systems.
We have to deal with Lakewood as it is now, not what we remember it to be.

To get back to the comparison, I'd like to ask the earlier question in a different way. Ignoring that the outer suburbs seem to pass the proficiency tests at a stride of 90+%, the first level of proficiency and really the only one that this test seems to evaluate is if more than 75% have passed each subject at each grade. In looking at Lakewood as well as the state there seem to be more problems at the 5th and 8th grade levels than others. What is on the proficiency tests for these grades that is so much more difficult. The most reasonable explanation I can think of is that the curriculum of most of the state is not in step with the proficiency test. So without making this a personal attack on a resident being critical of the local school district or blaming George W Bush, what are the proposed solutions? Should the test be given later in the year, should the curriculum be adjusted to match the proficiency test? As many issues as there may be with NCLB, I don't have any issue with leveling the playing field across the country and holding teachers and students to some expectations to actually learn the material.

William,
I think your posts are brilliant and relavent seeing you are a former student in Lakewood and have children here. However, I don't think residency laws for teachers is the best idea. I am applying to student teach in the west side of Cleveland. I think having children in the Lakewood school district could present a boundary issue, if for example, I ever have an issue I want to present to the board in regards to my children's education. I also might not want to run into parents on my down time to discuss their child. And, like mentioned above, might not want the cross-over to my children if a student I have doesn't particularly like me!

I do agree with Shawn that we should be looking directly at the curriculum in the areas he mentioned to see how we can teach those standards better if we are not making the mark.

As far as NCLB, it is clear that both parties voted for it, and having learned that theory and practice are often two different realities, both parites want to change it. Why has Bush refused to revisit the deficiencies? Having standards in teaching is necessary. Having higher standards for children with disabilities was also necessary because, although we have come a long, long way in Special Education, there were many students slipping through cracks and unprepared in life because there were low expectations for them. To go completely to the other side, however, and expect ALL the same test scores for all the disabled students and the regular education students is insanity at best! And not preparing many students for real life, who might better be served in a vocational area and just not needing what is required of some of those tests! To revisit and revise NCLB is a no-brainer, which is why our president refuses to do it and why many are being hurt by it.

As far as computers educating children, well when the government is run by robots I will revisit that one.

Justine Cooper wrote: As far as computers educating children, well when the government is run by robots I will revisit that one.

Our dinner table conversation yesterday revolved around this subject. My children as are most children in this day and age are very computer savvy and as I said earlier all use computers and technology in their classrooms. I asked what they thought about learning by computers and they didn't really like the idea. Some of the comments we that art was used along with teaching certain subjects and a computer wouldn't do that. My older son said that they did a lot of learning in discussion groups. My daughter like the games that are played with the teacher. What I got from my kids is that they thrive on the human contact which I agree is so important. It teaches them more than academics, it teaches them how to interact with people and I worry that as technological society is today that we already are lacking human interaction, I'd hate to see us lose more. And if parents really want their kids to learn by computer I've seen commercials for some free state sponsored homeschool program taught 100% on computers.

History teaches that there have always been people who fear technological advances, some of whom refuse to adapt, and disappear into the backwaters of economic failure, although I suppose a few can get work as exhibits in museums.

Computers and computerized machines are not robots; they are tools used by people to be more productive. The government already uses lots of computers, and we receive better service because of that. Mail is no longer sorted by hand. Checks are issued by machine. Police use radios, and identify fingerprints by machine.

I worked for the government when our agency was converting to computers. As we were preparing legal documents, they had to be letter perfect, and corrections were not allowed, so if you transposed some digits at the very end of the document, you had to go back and redo it, by hand, from the beginning. Being able to make corrections by machine before memorizing the document saved us a lot of time, and that the document was already in the system when we finalized it saved the agency and our clients a lot of time, as it didn't have to be processed by a typist, then returned for review (possibly multiple times), then input by an input clerk (without review, which made for a lot of work when they made an error and we tried to trace it). I recall one SOF who couldn't adapt, so he went ahead and did his documents by hand, then input them and filed his handwritten document right on top of the the machine copy. Naturally, he couldn't meet production standards (i.e., claimants who were unlucky enough to fall into his clutches had to wait a lot longer for a decision), and eventually was put out to pasture.

As to making a decision based on interviews with a few students, I think its nice that they are considered, but I don't think their feelings should bear a lot of weight. First, its certainly possible that the interviewer has feelings, and is directing the interview to elicit answers that support his feelings. Second. the student's opinion is likely to be based on whether they had fun, rather than whether they learned anything (a subsequent interview after the student couldn't get into a good college because he hadn't mastered fractions, for example, could elicit a very different answer). Third, young students don't have enough experience to make a valid decision, if they haven't been exposed to both systems. Its like asking someone who has always driven Fords whether they are better than Chevies; if he has no experience with Chevies, what value is his opinion (that won't stop him, of course, from giving one)?

When I attended law school, the school had students give written evaluations of the instructor at the end of the course, then kept them in the library. So before signing up for a course, you could look up the past evaluations of the instructor. I signed up for a course because the evaluations of that instructor were glowing; far better than those of the other instructors in that field. Alas, after a few days in the course, I realized that the high evaluations were apparently because the instructor was friendly, and didn't demand much from the students. In the field of law, little is ever invariably true, nor invariably false, yet this instructor (and I use the term loosely) gave a true/false midterm, and a true/false final. So I ended up with a good grade, but almost no knowledge of that area of the law. In that case, the evaluations by mature and intelligent students were plainly wrong.

In my opinion, a friendly, demanding teacher is ideal, but if I have to choose, I want the demanding teacher, as I'm more interested in mastering the material than in feeling good and being ignorant. In high school, the best teacher I had was not attractive and not friendly, but she was civil. I disliked her during high school; it was only when I got to college that I realized I was far better prepared then my contemporaries from other schools, and I was smart enough to realize it was her fault, not mine, so I went back and thanked her. My point is that my evaluation of her during high school would have been sincere, but wholly wrong.

Over they years, I have used computerized lessons, and the old-style teacher at the front of the classroom lessons, sometimes for the same subject. When I took typing at Horace Mann, the boys in the class were not serious students (at that time, typing was women's work), so we had a lot of fun dismantling the typewriters and jumping out of the window, and were never caught by the teacher. After a few years, I saw that keyboarding was a necessary skill, and bought a program. The program never let me make a mistake without demanding that I correct it, and kept absolutely accurate records of my progress, something a teacher dealing with a class full of students cannot hope to match.

I understand that kids like to play games, with or without the teacher, but I also understand that participation is such activities is not universal; there are always some students who try to monopolize the game, but worse, there are always some students who are not actively involved, and thus are not learning.

As for social skills, I think that is not useful in academics, and those skills can be acquired in group activities, and even outside of school. I suppose having a gab fest in the back of the room while the rest of the class tries to focus on the subject being taught qualifies as learning social skills, but as far as academics go, it is counterproductive. Let them learn to text message in some other environment, not when they are supposed to be learning math.

I've been thinking about automated teaching for quite a while, and it is catching on in the colleges, but the public schools have been very reluctant to use computers as other than a research adjunct. The sole courses that I have thought of where traditional classroom training is necessary are speech (you need an audience to get over the fear of audiences) and the gym classes.

I can't help it, but I have a picture of you Luddites refusing to use ATMs, and demanding that the supermarket check you out by hand, rather than by scanning, and the supermarket telling you to shop elsewhere, as they don't have the resources to do hand checkouts. And I'm a bit surprised you are in this forum as often as you are; wouldn't you be more comfortable hanging broadsides on light poles?