Academics in Winton Woods School District

173 posts in this topic

Posted · Report post

Forget the teachers, administrators, and support personnel regarding facilities for a moment. How do the facilities affect student learning?

We certainly cannot predict where education will be 20, 30, 40 years from now so we must make facilities that give the greatest flexibility for whatever may occur.

The current facilities can never hope to live up to what could happen. They were built in a different era with different purposes and with very little thought about change.

Teachers can teach anywhere. Can students LEARN anywhere? If facilities cannot improve educational outcomes can poor and outdated facilities impede educational outcomes? I think they can and are.

It isn't about pretty buildings, it's about efficiency and cost-effectiveness in delivering educational services.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Can students LEARN anywhere?

Bejeezus, you need to go back to school yourself. Of course they can. They did 100 years ago in one-room schools with other children of all ages...and home-schooled kids prove they can learn now at the dining room table. SMDH

blink.gifblink.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Not trying to hijack the topic, but I think the way to get started here is to get the student discipline under control. That will allow the teachers to focus on teaching. Be firm, stand firm and don't back down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

In my view, the evaluation of construction of new buildings should be based on a purely economic analysis of build vs. maintain. If detailed and credible data show that maintaining a particular structure is more expensive, then fine, replace it. If the data are shown to be not credible, support will evaporate. For purposes of this discussion, I would assume that new buildings would have zero effect on learning, and zero effect on school ratings (probably close to true). Keep it about the dollars and let it succeed or fail on those terms alone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

In my view, the evaluation of construction of new buildings should be based on a purely economic analysis of build vs. maintain. If detailed and credible data show that maintaining a particular structure is more expensive, then fine, replace it. If the data are shown to be not credible, support will evaporate. For purposes of this discussion, I would assume that new buildings would have zero effect on learning, and zero effect on school ratings (probably close to true). Keep it about the dollars and let it succeed or fail on those terms alone.

Agreed, thank you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

In my view, the evaluation of construction of new buildings should be based on a purely economic analysis of build vs. maintain. If detailed and credible data show that maintaining a particular structure is more expensive, then fine, replace it. If the data are shown to be not credible, support will evaporate. For purposes of this discussion, I would assume that new buildings would have zero effect on learning, and zero effect on school ratings (probably close to true). Keep it about the dollars and let it succeed or fail on those terms alone.

The data are credible despite what some might wish to believe. The data showed that some buildings were decrepit 10 years ago and the district did NOT attempt to ask the communities to build new. The buildings have only gotten worse in the ensuing years and the district could still limp along maintaining them, but I believe that is truly throwing good money after bad.

When the current buildings were first constructed, there was no discussion about tying the need for buildings to student achievement. The buildings had to be built because there were students who had to be taught, however well or ill.

The cost to merely maintain the current buildings is rapidly approaching the cost of new buildings and the analyses shows it.

Cincinnati Public Schools, Mt. Healthy, and now Princeton have new buildings because they were needed and not because the students do well or poorly. AND they had the incentive of state money (OUR taxes) to help offset the cost.

As it stands now, more and more taxpayer dollars are being spent to maintain old and obsolete buildings meaning that those same dollars cannot be spent on educational resources for students. It isn't cost-effective to continue to merely maintain these buildings. Building new buildings does not guarantee improved student achievement, but neither does keeping old and increasingly expensive-to-maintain buildings.

It isn't about pretty buildings, it's about which buildings are more cost-effective for now and the future and which buildings provide the best OPPORTUNITY for increase student achievement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Three hats is correct. If you think that you are going to "send a message" in voting down a bond issue, you may be cutting your nose off to spite your face.

The fact is, over the next 30 years, you will have to spend millions of dollars to repair your buildings as well as the higher maintenance costs. I don't care if we have the lowest scores on the planet. It is a fact. At some point, you may not have a choice in the matter. I am well aware that there are Catholic schools built in the 1920's that are still operational. However, public schools have different standards. Winton Woods is bound by those rules.

(BTW, It is also true that Catholic Schools engage in new construction too. Bishop Fenwick being an example.)

I have no problem going round and round on student achievement. It is a fair discussion and one that I will continue to engage in. From the staff's standpoint, I can tell you, we DID NOT push for new school construction. Perhaps some members of the community were embarrassed by the leaking roofs and rooms being converted to "teaching classrooms" that prompted them to act. Perhaps they saw what was possible and thought that it was something worthy of your consideration. Virtually every community around us has the same issue.

This has nothing to do with "rewarding" anybody with a new building any more than "rewarding" yourself with a new car after your Honda craps out after almost 200,000 miles.

The staff will make do with whatever the community decides without complaint, I can assure you of that. We only ask that you consider the pros and cons of what is best for the children of your community-- regardless of your view of their academic achievement. We are well aware of the significant sacrifice many of you already make in taxes to this district. It sucks that our state funds schools this way. It is not fair. It is too bad that we aren't talking about a football stadium. THAT would get done, right? Most of us don't live in the district, so the decision that you make will far outlive our careers. It's up to you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

How do the facilities affect student learning?

They don't. If what you're saying is true, then St. X produces crap, Elder produces junk, LaSalle produces morons, Roger Bacon, McCauley...and, so on, produces a bunch of idiots. It's not true! You want the levy to pass and you're so desperate, you spew nonsense. You all sound ridiculous because if building new, instead of fixing was the way to go, we would all be tearing our homes down right now. But, we don't because it simply doesn't make sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

In my view, the evaluation of construction of new buildings should be based on a purely economic analysis of build vs. maintain. If detailed and credible data show that maintaining a particular structure is more expensive, then fine, replace it. If the data are shown to be not credible, support will evaporate. For purposes of this discussion, I would assume that new buildings would have zero effect on learning, and zero effect on school ratings (probably close to true). Keep it about the dollars and let it succeed or fail on those terms alone.

The data the district produces will be vague and skewed. That's how you convince people it makes sense. If their estimates for "fixing" were accurate, then I will volunteer to project manage the plan, contract out the work and take home what remains from the taxpayer's money. I guarantee you I'd come out of the situation a multi-millionaire. Also, for those people who believe that building new is better than refurbishing I challenge you to tear down your house and build something more efficient because that would make more sense than putting on a new roof, or fixing the bathroom.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

You want real change, take that old decrepit useless historical white building and develop a Fine and Performing Arts Academy. School by day, academy by night. Then you can take advantage of the grants available for Fine and Performing Arts, plus other grants that are out there specifically geared to a specific demographic...which we surpass, grants for historical buildings. When I was working at a local private school I had the opportunity to review grants. Grantt...after grant, after grant the criteria screamed Winton Woods. That's real change. Make that a success and people will come. Stand out. Be different. Be unique. Strive for Excellence. Then move on to the next career academy. Forget the new buildings. Work on real change. Get money elsewhere. Take advantage of our demographics and historical assets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

The fact is, over the next 30 years, you will have to spend millions of dollars to repair your buildings as well as the higher maintenance costs. I don't care if we have the lowest scores on the planet. It is a fact. At some point, you may not have a choice in the matter.

Could you please explain what you mean when you said "At some point, you may not have a choice in the matter." ?

thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Could you please explain what you mean when you said "At some point, you may not have a choice in the matter." ?

thanks

I think that somebody will go to court and mandate the repairs that the local taxpayer won't make.

Many lawsuits have been filed that required state and local governments to build new prisons. I can see the same thing happening in the future with schools. New rights are being dreamed up every day. Get the case before the right liberal judge..... Heck, Mike Brown threatens to take Hamilton County to court every year over something they are supposed to provide the Bengals with.

Look, I don't want to scare anybody into voting for something that they don't want to vote for, but the fact is that there will be a huge cost to maintain all of our buildings for the next 37 years. Mr. Denny outlined these costs. Feel free to bring him your own estimates.

Inefficient energy delivery systems alone currently cost the district a lot of money.

Send your message about academic achievement, but you probably won't be "off the hook" for any decision that you make on the facilities..no matter what the local Catholic school looks like.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

"Many lawsuits have been filed that required state and local governments to build new prisons. I can see the same thing happening in the future with schools."

so voters should say yes before the state shoves it down their throats?

that's a great marketing strategy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

I think that somebody will go to court and mandate the repairs that the local taxpayer won't make.

Who controls the dollars Eq? The taxpayer is already paying for repairs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

I think that somebody will go to court and mandate the repairs that the local taxpayer won't make.

Wow. This sounds like a desperate plea to get us to vote yes. I think I'll wait for it to go to court and the appeals process to work out. Besides, who in Greenhills, Forest Park and Springfield township can afford the lawyer fees for this lawsuit. If it's WW initiating the lawsuit then they will loose credibility with me, because it just show that they are willing to spend money on lawyers for crazy lawsuit than on the students. Priorities? Don't think a lawsuit will ever happen, nor do a think a lawyer will do it pro bono either, because there will be nothing them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

For goodness sake! There is NO lawsuit and this absurd notion is absolutely NOT the strategy of the district.

The only correlation this comment has to me is I would rather support schools with my tax dollars rather than to be spent to build more prisons.

Tends to be more cost effective....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

An effective school system that produces a product that has the capacity upon graduation to enter into good entry level jobs and/or to continue education certainly will save money on the long run because it will help reduce the numbers in the prison populations. However, the key is education, not brick and mortar.

The only guarantee for potential success is academic efficiency,, this means students must learn the basics of a good education so they can be positioned for future growth.

Cicero

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

If the issue is whether to repair or replace the school building(s), the question is actually about brick and mortar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

No Paula, the primary topic for this thread is Academic Achievement, the proper place to really comment in brick and mortar is under the Topic that concerns the Bond Issue.

There seems to be a building consensus that new buildings will probably not impact the academic standing of the system.

Cicero

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

No  Paula, the primary topic for this thread is Academic Achievement, the proper place to really comment in brick and mortar is under the Topic that concerns the Bond  Issue.

There seems to be a building consensus that new buildings will probably not impact the academic standing of the system.

Cicero

I would not agree- I still believe that continuity of classes with fewer transitions changing from building to building every 2 years would improve scores and promote academic growth.

In addition to cost savings from streamlining 6 schools to 2 main school campuses, Greenhills has much to gain with a Pre K- 6th grade school within its' borders not to mention the payroll taxes paid to Greenhills.

Keep these facts in mind. The state is only offering 1/3 of the costs for limited time. There are major, costly repairs that still have to be made. Before we spend the money on costly repairs ( that will also need to be paid by tax payers) please take a careful,objective examination of the proposal.

Also note there is a limit to Ohio monies. If I recall correctly, should the bond levy fail 3 times, Ohio pulls the supplemental money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

I would not agree- I still believe that continuity of classes with fewer transitions changing from building to building every 2 years would improve scores and promote academic growth.

I'm sure this has been done elsewhere. How were their scores affected?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

I'm sure this has been done elsewhere. How were their scores affected?

Good question-

one article below speaks about both residential moves and also school changes while staying in the same residence. Our district experiences both now. While this article can cite more expert studies than I, my personal experience has noticed this same outcome.

Transitions from school to school is major in the life of a child. If you recall the transitions from elementary to middle and then to High School required a period of adjustment that replaces valuable time that would better be used for academics.

Additionally, the family participation becomes more stable and consistent with fewer moves. One other disadvantage of frequent moves is a family could have children in multiple buildings. With desire to support each child is present, the ability to divide time between each building diminishes the positive outcome.

http://www.nhc.org/media/files/Insights_Ho...cationBrief.pdf

Many will speak this is the current design is the design of the district, and yes, this is true. This is reality to save/stretch shrinking dollars but at what expense. At that time, the district had to take the assets it had and devise a program.

This is why it is important to examine all outcomes before arriving at decision. There are definitely pros and cons for each point. It is important to do this correctly now while we have the chance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

I would not agree- I still believe that continuity of classes with fewer transitions changing from building to building every 2 years would improve scores and promote academic growth.

In addition to cost savings from streamlining 6 schools to 2 main school campuses, Greenhills has much to gain with a Pre K- 6th grade school within its' borders not to mention the payroll taxes paid to Greenhills.

Keep these facts in mind. The state is only offering 1/3 of the costs for limited time. There are major, costly repairs that still have to be made. Before we spend the money on costly repairs ( that will also need to be paid by tax payers) please take a careful,objective examination of the proposal.

Also note there is a limit to Ohio monies. If I recall correctly, should the bond levy fail 3 times, Ohio pulls the supplemental money.

You people need to make up your mind. First you needed to combine classes in different buildings, now that is not the way to go. Does anyone know how to do anything except ask for money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

The combining of classes is not the problem. To me the issue is transition from new building to new building every 2 years. Again this decision was based upon the desire NOT to ask for more money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

The combining of classes is not the problem. To me the issue is transition from new building to new building every 2 years. Again this decision was based upon the desire NOT to ask for more money.

In my opinion the decision to break up the grade schools was a bad one. I think the parents, students and teachers were all much happier when the kids went to the same school for 1-6 without the change every two years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now