The Observation Deck

Dave,

Thanks, that was very informative but for the record I did not come up with the grade methodology. It was how I was graded in public schools and I’m positively certain that I could never convince one of my teachers that she shouldn’t expect anyone in her class to get all the answers correct. I don’t even want to think about the results from making that remark in the days of rulers and every teacher knew how to use them effectively.

Feel free to correct me but the state rating for school districts is similar to grading on the curve, although the subject matter is known, variables are expected, therefore they are factored in the overall grade that allows a lower grade such as B- to result in an “excellent”.

If this were true, would you not agree the top ten school district rating are significantly higher than Lakewood’s 96.4 since ODE never planned for a score of 120 to be achievable? However, we can agree that a score of 109.7 is obtainable.

I believe the school board and management are responsible for the quality of product the district produces at all levels. They are also responsible for allowing the teacher’s union to dictate employment policies that may affect the quality of the product. The reason the school district is in denial about the need for improvement, is the overall opinion they are doing an “excellent” job based on an grading system that is best defined as gibberish.

I would assume the average scores of the achievement tests given to the students is a better but not the only indicator of the true quality of product the district is producing. There should more than a little concern about the grade scores in the high school. Since the lack of resources is not a viable excuse that leads us, back to the district’s board and management.

Mr Baker:

Your posts demonstrate to me that you are a very interested citizen concerning our schools. You also seem to be looking for ways that they can, and should improve.

I wish that we had more concerned citizens like you.

I would really like for you to visit the schools, if you have not already done so.

The belief that I have, is that some of your assumptions could well change, with a closer look at what's really happening in the schools. I'll try to help by making a few observations here.

The "excellent" rating is produced outside of the district, and is based on a compilation of 3 objective parameters: attendance, test scores, and graduation rates. It does not mean that a district is perfect.

In fact, as the federal guidelines were written, public school districts needed to show annual improvement, or risk losing dollars. That put unbelievable pressure on districts, particularly those having large numbers of at-risk students, special needs students or second language students.

All of us, and not only the school board and administration, share in the responsibility of educating our community's children. Teachers, and particularly, parents, both have vital roles in that process. So often, in a community where there are at-risk students, some parents too, can have issues that can impact student support at home.

Parental support is vital to student success. Fortunately, in Lakewood, we still have many supportive and involved parents, and that makes a BIG difference.

I would need to take exception to your thought that teachers' unions "dictate employment policies", when in fact, unions have virtually nothing to do with a district's policy development at all. Unions function as a collective bargaining unit at contract time, and also, in a representative function; if there is a grievance process underway, involving a member employee.

The School Board alone sets district policy. (that policy must align, however, with state and federal guidelines)

I have seen no evidence, by the way, as a Lakewood Schools volunteer and a retired teacher, that the Board would be in "denial" about anything, or that they are resting on that "excellent" laurel. The fact is, whether we agree with everything they do or not, the Board comprises hard working members of our community who do that work for altogether too little money, and, I believe, altogether too little appreciation, for their time and efforts.

Check out, for example, how LITTLE a school board member is compensated for their time here in Lakewood. I think that would probably amaze you.

Back to the banjo...

Richard Baker wrote:Dave,

Thanks, that was very informative but for the record I did not come up with the grade methodology. It was how I was graded in public schools and I’m positively certain that I could never convince one of my teachers that she shouldn’t expect anyone in her class to get all the answers correct.

Richard –

You realize that not even Ottawa Hills, which you correctly listed as earning the most points of any Ohio District/school entity, scored 109.8 out of 120 for an “Excellent with Distinction” designation. If this doesn’t prove that, like the MCATS, ACT, SAT or other tests, a perfect 120 is virtually impossible to achieve, then I don’t know what will. (Don't we see an article every three years or so where one high school student earned a perfect score on an ACT or SAT? How many millions of kids take this test every decade and maybe three get a perfect score.)

Again, state designations are not based on the 100 point A, B, C, D and F grade scale utilized by teacher.

You are wrongly applying the letter grade methodology to the ODE point scale.


Can areas within Lakewood’s schools be further improved? Yes. The same is also true for Ottawa Hills, Beachwood (107.2), Rocky River (106.1) and every other Ohio district/school entity.

However, Lakewood was under “Continuous Improvement” in 2003-2004. Can anyone argue that Lakewood’s overall performance has not improved in the last 6-7 years?


I’m not trying to put words in your mouth, but, it seems to me that you are arguing that a passed levy will not lead to further performance enhancements. Is this the gist?



It seems that the vast majority of opinions made her are predetermined then we go out and try to find facts with which to back fill. I’m really resisting the urge to do so in this case and that’s why I’ve been pushing back on some of your notions and appreciate the push back on mine.

Dave,

We both can agree that a high level of funding is not necessary for achieving a high score in the ODE ranking system. I do question the logic of giving a school district “excellence”, rating without all the grade levels scholastic test scores meeting the definition of the word, “Excellence is the state or quality of excelling. Particularly in the field of business and organizations, excellence is considered to be an important value, and a goal to be pursued”.

I personally think the state scoring system is a lot of marketing spin and crap given to the taxpayers by ODE to elevate the true grade of the school district. In my opinion the A, B, C, D, E, & F scoring system will be better understood since it will not necessary to have lengthy discussions to understand. Incidentally, there is nothing wrong with a B grade when you working to improve it to an A.

You are correct; I believe that additional funding will not guarantee improvement in the districts scholastic test scores. It also obvious from the state ranking system, achievement is not necessarily associated with funding, but how well it is fiscally managed.

Gary,

My interest is with any government bodies that have abused their privilege and responsibly to the people they serve. These bodies continue to submit the preposterous solutions by tapping the taxpayers and many future generations for funding to satisfy an immediate financial need due their current and past excessive spending habits.

I cannot claim that individuals of governing bodies don’t possess the intelligence to control a budget. Evan a squirrel knows how many nuts it needs to store for the winter. I do question their collective lack of common sense, fiduciary management, and ability to make independent decisions separate from those presented by their staff. Taxpayers cannot continue to support a system with the strategy of appeasing the self-interests and patronage of the employees in the “system”.

Will all due respect, if a person makes a decision to fulfill their civic obligation by serving on local boards, city council, township boards, committees, etc. it should be for the right reason, improving the community services by making them more efficient. Unlike the state’s grading system, the school district boards’ compensation is not convoluted. Some but not all of the people take a position of public trust that are there for the wrong reasons, private or political agenda, compensation, benefits, barking dog, or public recognition. The students will have a better education if the funds are used for another teacher rather than a part-time board member’s salary increase.

Many questions have been raised that challenge the necessity of the pending tax levy. The websites are interesting but they don’t provide solutions to the problems that face this school district. This school district has historically enjoyed more than reasonable funding from the taxpayers but in return, the taxpayers are not receiving equable results. Eventually the school board will have to agree on a budget that accounts for declining property taxes, fewer students, a building program it cannot afford, property that sits vacant [unutilized assets] and taxpayers unwilling and unable to fund business as usual. It might as well be now rather than later.

but in return, the taxpayers are not receiving equable results

Please elucidate?!

The school district’s claim that a levy is necessary so they can continue to perform at the “excellent” level contradicts the ODE’s list of school districts performance that demonstrates funding does not equate to a higher-level of achievement.

We can then reasonably conclude if the school district has enjoyed more than adequate funding then according to the board’s own claim, funding equates to achievement, the districts past performance should have been “excellent with distinction”.

From personal experience if there ever was a time for a school board to have honestly and open dialog with the voters to pass a levy, it is now. The day of wine and roses is over including the b… s…. from taxing bodies. I’m not sure if this school board realizes that high property taxes have a negative effect on the local economy and property values, if they don’t, I owe an apology to the squirrel.

I hope this makes my statement more coherent and now back to the single malt scotch.

Richard Baker wrote:The school district’s claim that a levy is necessary so they can continue to perform at the “excellent” level contradicts the ODE’s list of school districts performance that demonstrates funding does not equate to a higher-level of achievement.

We can then reasonably conclude if the school district has enjoyed more than adequate funding then according to the board’s own claim, funding equates to achievement, the districts past performance should have been “excellent with distinction”.

I hope this makes my statement more coherent and now back to the single malt scotch.

Richard

I am not sure anyone has mentioned that ALL School Districts need more money to
maintain an excellent rating. So not sure where that came from.

Merely this district.

Richard Baker wrote:From personal experience if there ever was a time for a school board to have honestly and open dialog with the voters to pass a levy, it is now. The day of wine and roses is over including the b… s…. from taxing bodies. I’m not sure if this school board realizes that high property taxes have a negative effect on the local economy and property values, if they don’t, I owe an apology to the squirrel.

I would agree that this is true.

But after the levy we will discuss what is going on behind the scenes.


.

The trouble is, that all of this amounts to being a virtually seamless web.

Impact one area of education financially, and other areas can fall like dominoes.

By whatever yardstick of measurement, the Lakewood schools are doing a great job... for now.

My very simple point remains, that if some kind of taxpayer revolt kicks in towards the Lakewood schools, (whether some would feel that sort of thing to be justifiable or not) it will still be the children, their parents, and the community as a whole, who will pay the price. If we fail to stay competitive as a district, comparable to surrounding communities, then the whole question of our community's value and desirability will come into play. The quality of our schools has been amply demonstrated by staff and students alike, up to this point. If we want that quality to continue, I think that we'd better continue to do our part, and ante up.

There are many more expenses incurred by a public school district, these days, that were not around when we were young: Federal mandates, charter and private school expenses, security, special education, state mandated curriculum expenses, technology expenditures... the list goes on and on, as do the increasing utility and cost-of-living issues.

One can agree or disagree as to how our local schools should be funded, but the fact remains that for now, the ball remains in our court.

Gary Rice wrote:Impact one area of education financially, and other areas can fall like dominoes.

This levy is needed for one reason and one reason only: 20% payraises promised to school board employees.

Why 20% raises? Why not a wage freeze? Why not a pay cut?

Speaking of Reason:

http://reason.tv/video/show/3-reasons-w ... -sector-em

Bill certainly has the right to his opinions, but I feel the necessity of calling his allegation into question, as I cannot find any substantive foundation for it, at all, anywhere.

WHO EVER promised ANYONE a 20% raise around here, or anywhere else, for that matter?

WHO promised WHAT, to WHOM? WHEN?

Document that please, Bill, if you can.

There HAS BEEN a wage freeze in place, by the way.

I would think that there could be no guarantee that ANY RAISE OF ANY KIND will happen to ANY school employee, unless that would be negotiated in some future settlement.

...and if there WERE a raise, I have personally NEVER seen a raise beyond a few percentage points happen in the teaching profession. Ever. (Certainly not a double digit raise, much less a 20% figure)

I am a retired teacher and the child of a retired Lakewood teacher. I KNOW how LITTLE teachers make for most of their careers. I know HOW MUCH my family struggled, how Dad had to work several jobs to make ends meet, and in my own career, how little I made over the years, compared to my private-sector friends.

The one bright light in that tunnel financially, was that we had benefits and a retirement plan. Even with those issues, we had to struggle for whatever we could negotiate for.

The unrelenting attacks, made lately, on public sector employees, are absolutely baffling to me. We teach your children, protect your homes and properties, clean your neighborhoods, and fight your fires. In the process, in all of those professions, we often put our very lives on the line for you.

I simply do not understand this kind of thinking at all.

Perhaps, as has been pointed out, some people would like to do away with the public sector entirely. The thing is, as long as there is a public sector, it is responsible to you, the voter. Were everything to become privatized, and presumably, turned into a profit-making enterprise, you then would have all the usual expenses, plus the need of extracting a profit to pay to someone.

How do you think all of THAT would turn out for you?

$$$?

Back to the banjo...

I just have a question...sorry if I missed it in this thread.

How many school levy votes has Lakewood had in the last 5-10 years and were they approved or shot-down?

Thanks.

J---- to the best of my recollection in the past 5 - 10 years there has only been one levy request for an increase in operating funds. There have been two construction levys, I think, for the rebuilding program.

On a slightly different topic--- everybody will notice once again that Bill Call has just pulled numbers out of his *** (and I don't mean AIR).

Gary's request for substantiation, while proper, can unfortunately never be fulfilled by Bill. In fact his outright malicious lies have sadly made any worthwhile arguments by anybody against the levy illegitimate.

Bill, while you have a right of sorts to have a twisted sort of fun you have discredited by association others who have reasonable questions and views.

Stan Austin

Stan Austin wrote:On a slightly different topic--- everybody will notice once again that Bill Call has just pulled numbers out of his *** (and I don't mean AIR).
Gary's request for substantiation, while proper, can unfortunately never be fulfilled by Bill. In fact his outright malicious lies have sadly made any worthwhile arguments by anybody against the levy illegitimate.

This is Deja vu all over again. From the five year forecast:

SALARIES AND BENEFITS
57,292,940 2010
67,788,236 2014
10,495,296 18%

PURCHASED SERVICES

13,467,146 2010
16,977,436 2014
3,510,290 26%

http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates ... tent=69503

If the board estimates:

fewer teachers and
fewer administrators and
fewer students and
retirements of higher priced employees

How do you end up with an 18% increase in labor costs if no one is getting a raise?
The union has agreed to no Cola raise this year on the condition that the board still grant step raises and other raises.

The union also insists that the issue of COLA be “revisted” after the levy passes. What do you suppose they mean when they say revisit?

It is important to note that the teacher’s pension fund is grossly underfunded. Lakewood’s share for that unfunded liability is going to be in the MILLIONS OF DOLLARS. Those anticipated costs are not included in the financial forecast.

How do you get a 20% raise on a $65,000 salary:

Year one: 3% cola 3% step - $68,900
Year two: 3% cola 3% step - $73,034
Year three: 3% cola 3% step - $77,416

Raise: 19%. Ooops, I guess that’s not 20%. On the other hand what do they mean by revisit? On the other hand that doesn’t include raises for continuing education and other reasons.

The majority of this School Board has shown itself to be duplicitous and unresponsive in its handling of the closure of Grant Elementary School. Why should we trust them on the issue of a levy?

Why not settle the contract first so the people can see what they are buying?

Biil what would you say if you knew our elementary population was going up? Would you then admit maybe the district had to a hire a few teachers and perhaps that would be a cause for salaries to rise.

I don't think anyone LIKES to pay more taxes, but there are things I AM willing to pay for, like a good education and health care for all.

My kids went to LHS and loved it. I was happy with the education they received. The teachers were motivating and dedicated. I think Mr Wagner is doing a heck of a job managing the high school.

The least I can do is to put forth an effort to insure that others will have the same experience that my kids did.

I am voting FOR the levy.