An open reply to Ms. Andrew
Printed From: MiddletownUSA.com
Category: Middletown City Schools
Forum Name: School Board
Forum Description: Discuss the board individually and as a group.
URL: http://www.middletownusa.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=2515
Printed Date: Apr 19 2024 at 5:18am
Topic: An open reply to Ms. Andrew
Posted By: Mike_Presta
Subject: An open reply to Ms. Andrew
Date Posted: Jan 10 2010 at 3:53am
Ms. Andrew: First, let me thank you for addressing our concerns. However, although you state that I am “reading too much in to the date on a letter”, you add nothing to assuage those concerns. Certainly you can understand how the Board of Education (BoE) contributed to the public’s skepticism by choosing to conduct the search for a new superintendent under a cloak of secrecy. The BoE continually asked us to believe that you had no knowledge of the identities of these candidates. Perhaps I “read too much” into Rev, Tyus’s words in his letter-to-the editor dated 12/16/2009 wherein he wrote:
Somehow, I “read into” that exactly what it says--that the MCSD BoE had, in their possession “30 resumes…of candidates from which to choose.” prior to your interviews with the “short list” of eight candidates on December 11th and 12th! Need I remind you that not only Rev. Tyus, but also you and the other three BoE members signed that letter-to-the-editor? In summary, Rev. Tyus’s letter (signed by the entire BoE) clearly states that the BoE had the resumes of the top THIRTY candidates in their possession not only PRIOR to December 11, but with enough lead time to narrow the THIRTY down to EIGHT with enough additional lead time for those eight to arrange trips to Middletown for interviews over the weekend of December 11. According to The Middletown Journal: “Board members Monday night, Dec. 7 said they have not received from their consultant the names of the candidates they will interview this weekend.” Am I “reading too much” into this to wonder aloud, if the list had NOT been narrowed down yet from 30 to 8 by the night of December 7, and there were NO MEETINGS of the BoE between the December 7 meeting and the December 11th and 12th interviews, how in the world did the list get narrowed down from THIRTY to EIGHT??? And with all of these apparent conflicts, improbabilities and impossibilities in mind, what would you expect a reasonable person to “read into” the facts that:
You see, those five items are already a part of the "record"! Please tell me, Ms. Andrews, what possible explanation is reasonable and plausible; is consistent the above facts; and does not involve miracles nor Santa’s magic sleigh! Please lay out for me some scenario that would not require a child-like disbelief of reality to accept. Please, Ms. Andrews, I want to trust Middletown’s public officials, but in order for that to occur, somehow the facts and what the public officials expect us to believe must somehow be reasonable. The “record” is the “record”! Please go over the record of what has occurred and provide some logical, plausible explanation that makes everything fit together in a way that a reasonable person would conclude that everything on “the record” is true and above board, and all that follows is logical. I really do want to hear it. I will try hard to believe! I will try very hard, but you have to give me something to work with! Regards, Mike Presta ------------- “Mulligan said he ... doesn’t believe they necessarily make the return on investment necessary to keep funding them.” …The Middletown Journal, January 30, 2012 |
Marcia Andrew wrote:Replies:
Posted By: Pacman
Date Posted: Jan 10 2010 at 9:55am
|
Mike that Fax Number belongs to, check the bottom of this document:
http://www.carneysandoe.com/web/positions/MCSPD.pdf - http://www.carneysandoe.com/web/positions/MCSPD.pdf
BARRY ROWLAND Senior Search Consultant
Carney, Sandoe & Associates E-mail: barry.rowland@carneysandoe.com Tel: 416-656-6415; Fax: 416-651-8531 |
Posted By: Mike_Presta
Date Posted: Jan 10 2010 at 11:31am
|
Good eye, Pacman!! but it does beg the question of why a Boston firm with Boston telephone and fax numbers assigned this search to a Senior Search Consultant who apparently operates out of Toronto.
Also interesting is the fact that only Mr. Martin, out of the three finalists, bothered to comply with the last sentence of the Position Description:
Would this consultant and our esteemed BoE choose someone for this impportant position without checking references? I am sure that Ms. Andrew will clear this up when she responds to my post. ------------- “Mulligan said he ... doesn’t believe they necessarily make the return on investment necessary to keep funding them.” …The Middletown Journal, January 30, 2012 |
Posted By: Pacman
Date Posted: Jan 10 2010 at 12:20pm
|
Mike what good were the references on Martin's Resume? He made the final 3 even with all of his baggage. The BOE leadership states,
"Both Andrew and board member Greg Tyus said the board had been made aware of some of Martin’s issues, but wasn’t able to sift through the rumors and fact; therefore, they decided to select Martin based on his qualification and speak to him directly as part of the interview process." So they put him on the finalist list anyways. WHY? Even if it was all rumors, which I doubt, this district does not need anymore baggage to deal with from a Leadership position. The search firm couldn't clarify the rumors? So now we are going to possibly give them a second chance. Which will what drag this out until late Spring early summer at the rate the BOE moves. WHY? Very poor judgment by all involved in this matter. |
Posted By: Marcia Andrew
Date Posted: Jan 10 2010 at 2:02pm
|
Mr. Presta,
First, I am in fact Marcia Andrew, President of the Middletown Board of Education. I did post yesterday on this site, to correct an incorrect theory you are expounding. I (like you) believe that a person should be willing to acknowledge their postings and not hide behind anonymous tag names. I have also learned that if rumors aren't confronted early on, they are repeated until some believe them as verified fact.
I will try to respond to the points in your post. I went through the history of the search process with the new education reporter for the Middletown Journal, trying to clear up some of the misperceptions, but the Journal did not see fit to report any of my comments.
Carney, Sandoe posted the position description developed by the Board with input from the September forums. That search firm also actively recruited candidates for the position. As Mr. Rasmussen stated Friday night, he was not looking for the job and only threw his hat in the ring after being persuaded to do so by Carney, Sandoe. The search firm then screened the applicants based on our criteria, and presented 30 candidates to the Board at a meeting on November 21. We discussed the information in the candidates' resumes and their qualifications, including the search consultants' comments on initial telephone interviews he conducted with each of them.
We did not take away from the meeting copies of the resumes, or a list of names, and the search process included the search consultant returning resumes to all candidates. That is why, after we selected the 3 finalists, the Board asked the finalists to provide their resumes and a letter of interest directly to us. As soon as Rev. Tyus received these from the finalists, he turned them over to the Journal pursuant to their public records request.
The Board, not the consultant, narrowed the field from 30 to 8 for interviews, at the Nov. 21 meeting. However, until the consultant contacted those individuals to confirm their availability for interviews, we did not know for sure who we would be interviewing. As it happened, two withdrew (one had accepted another position, one for health reasons) and the search consultant then contacted the next 2 candidates in order of preference based on our discussions at the Nov. 21 meeting. Although their names had been mentioned, our focus was on their qualifications and experience, not their names, and since we did not have a list of names, we were not able to state them. The line you quote from the Journal about the Dec. 7th statements appears to have misquoted the unnamed board members. I am sure you will not be surprised that the Journal does not always accurately report the facts or accurately quote people. (Just last week, it stated that Tyus had been president of the board for 4 years. You and I know that is not correct).
Each of the finalists provided a list of references, and we have called each of those.
Contrary to popular opinion, the Board has no desire to be secret for the sake of secrecy. We chose not to disclose the names of candidates who did not make the finalist cut in order to insure the broadest field in order to find the best person to lead the Middletown schools. Many of the candidates would not have remained in the search if this process was not followed. We have been open about the process we are following, and have sought public input at several stages.
Marcia Andrew
|
Posted By: Hermes
Date Posted: Jan 10 2010 at 2:49pm
|
What happened to the gentleman who was awarded the superintendent job last August and then was hospitalized ? And what of the woman who allegedly replaced him temporarily ? The way I understood it we had no less than three people recieving superintendent salary. (As Price's salary continued for some time) Was neither of these people considered for the job or unable to continue ?
I have to agree with Mike Presta on the "air of secrecy". It would appear that the BOE does things amongst themselves and does not bring in the public until the 11th hour,which of course is then to late.
I think the boards approach to their hiring process needs considerable adjustment. Out of all the candidates how in the world does one slip through,I refer to the superintendent of Mansfield,with a record like he has ? Even though he has now withdrawn he should never have made it past the initial screening.
------------- No more democrats no more republicans,vote Constitution Party !! |
Posted By: Pacman
Date Posted: Jan 10 2010 at 3:31pm
| Ms Andrew I am not understanding why or how Martin slipped through the screening process and how he made it to the final 3. Personally when something like this slips through the system it leads the citizens to question the BOE's actions. After watching Rasmussen on tape and looking at the Wichita School System I would give him the nod. Dragging this out for another 3-6 months would not be good. |
Posted By: Mike_Presta
Date Posted: Jan 11 2010 at 2:40am
|
Ms. Andrew: Once again, let me thank you for your reply and for taking the time and trouble to try to clear up the issues surrounding the BoE’s search for a new superintendent for the district. In the interest of optimal clarity, I will insert any comments or questions directly within a copy of your last post, using a different font and color. First, I am in fact Marcia Andrew, President of the Middletown Board of Education.
I did post yesterday on this site, to correct an incorrect theory you are expounding. I (like you) believe that a person should be willing to acknowledge their postings and not hide behind anonymous tag names.
I have also learned that if rumors aren't confronted early on, they are repeated until some believe them as verified fact.
I will try to respond to the points in your post. I went through the history of the search process with the new education reporter for the Middletown Journal, trying to clear up some of the misperceptions, but the Journal did not see fit to report any of my comments.
Carney, Sandoe posted the position description developed by the Board with input from the September forums. That search firm also actively recruited candidates for the position. As Mr. Rasmussen stated Friday night, he was not looking for the job and only threw his hat in the ring after being persuaded to do so by Carney, Sandoe. The search firm then screened the applicants based on our criteria, and presented 30 candidates to the Board at a meeting on November 21. We discussed the information in the candidates' resumes and their qualifications, including the search consultants' comments on initial telephone interviews he conducted with each of them.
We did not take away from the meeting copies of the resumes, or a list of names, and the search process included the search consultant returning resumes to all candidates.
That is why, after we selected the 3 finalists, the Board asked the finalists to provide their resumes and a letter of interest directly to us. Forgive me, I guess that I am a tad slow. Let me be sure that I have this right: The BoE engaged a consultant (CSA), at a cost to the district in excess of $25K, to find suitable candidates for MCSD Superintendent. The consultant brought the resumes of about 30 candidates to Middletown where those thirty were short-listed to a group of eight, plus at least two alternates on or about November 21. After this meeting, all originals and copies (if any) of all resumes, along with all notes made by the BoE or any of the district’s staff, were collected by the consultant and the resumes were returned to the respective candidates. Then interviews were arranged with these eight candidates with the BoE, in Middletown, over the weekend of December 11. (It is unclear to me whether or not the BoE had access to resumes or their earlier notes or not during these interviews , or if the BoE was reminded of the identities of the interviewees.) At some point after these interviews, the BoE further shortened the list to three apparent finalists, “the Board” asked the finalists to provide their resumes directly to the BOARD. Mr. Sommers and Mr. Rasmussen apparently did so. However, somehow Mr. Martin’s resume, which I understood was included as one of those described above in your statement: “the search process included the search consultant returning resumes to all candidates” mysteriously was faxed from the consultant’s 416 telephone on December 19th. Are we to understand that Mr. Martin happened to be visiting with the consultant, at their office when “the Board asked the finalists to provide their resumes and a letter of interest directly to us.”? Or did Mr. Martin misunderstand your request, date it September 23, and send it instead to CSA even though it was addressed to the BoE in Middletown, and CSA forwarded it via fax merely as a courtesy? As soon as Rev. Tyus received these from the finalists, he turned them over to the Journal pursuant to their public records request. The Board, not the consultant, narrowed the field from 30 to 8 for interviews, at the Nov. 21 meeting. However, until the consultant contacted those individuals to confirm their availability for interviews, we did not know for sure who we would be interviewing. As it happened, two withdrew (one had accepted another position, one for health reasons) and the search consultant then contacted the next 2 candidates in order of preference based on our discussions at the Nov. 21 meeting.
Although their names had been mentioned, our focus was on their qualifications and experience, not their names, and since we did not have a list of names, we were not able to state them.
The line you quote from the Journal about the Dec. 7th statements appears to have misquoted the unnamed board members. I am sure you will not be surprised that the Journal does not always accurately report the facts or accurately quote people. (Just last week, it stated that Tyus had been president of the board for 4 years. You and I know that is not correct).
Each of the finalists provided a list of references, and we have called each of those. Contrary to popular opinion, the Board has no desire to be secret for the sake of secrecy. We chose not to disclose the names of candidates who did not make the finalist cut in order to insure the broadest field in order to find the best person to lead the Middletown schools. Many of the candidates would not have remained in the search if this process was not followed. We have been open about the process we are following, and have sought public input at several stages.
Thank you once again for your continued efforts to aid us in understanding the process accurately! ------------- “Mulligan said he ... doesn’t believe they necessarily make the return on investment necessary to keep funding them.” …The Middletown Journal, January 30, 2012 |
Posted By: Bobbie
Date Posted: Jan 11 2010 at 7:41am
|
Ms Andrew, Thank you for posting on this website. I do want to say that I am a mother of 3 in the Middletown School District, so if at times I come a little cross - well it is a little personal. Mr Presta brings up a lot of concerns regarding this process. I am not hear to debate if they are accurate or not - but tell you where there is smoke there is usually fire. I do not believe for one minute that you would review resumes, take notes and give all of that back. Please do not insult our intelligence on this one. I am utterly disgusted by the fact that Martin could have made it to the final 3. Even if what you say is true and you did not have his name, should the consultant that you paid good tax payer money too, let you know there could have been an issue with this candidate. All of the secrecy (for whatever reason) is why the school board does not get support and why levies do not pass. The forum last week - why was it to be set up with no questions from the parents/citizens? The majority of the people do not trust any of you, therefore that just added fuel to the fire that there was already a decision made. We all want Middletown Schools put back on the map of success, but it take more then just the school board - you are not the experts, none of us are. Please listen to what everyone is saying and be more open. Otherwise you have lost everyones respect and backing. |
Posted By: Marcia Andrew
Date Posted: Jan 11 2010 at 11:35am
|
Mr. Presta,
As to the facts, I think we are down to very minor details. When the 3 finalists were asked to send their resumes and letters of interest to Rev. Tyus, 2 did just that. Martin apparently misunderstood, and sent his resume and his older letter of interest to Carney, Sandoe (who had been handling all communications prior to that point). I respect that you may form a different opinion from those facts than I do; that's human nature.
There is not enough time in the day to correct all the errors the Journal makes, and the delay in getting letters to the editor printed means the correction comes out after everyone has made up their minds. That is in fact one reason why I decided to wade into the "enemy camp" here with my post.
Bobbie,
I can only tell you the truth, I can't force you to believe it. Many people in the community, particularly ones who have had experience recruiting and hiring employees, have told the Board that they understand why we used the process we did, and agree with it.
As to not structuring the candidate forum to allow for citizen questions, this was primarily to keep the forum focused on the major issues of concern to the community, given we did not have an unlimited amount of time. An "open mike" would have been likely to lead to side-tracking the forum to narrow questions of interest to only one or a few people. As it happened, the candidate agreed on his own initiative to stay after the event and answer questions directly. If you had attended the forum, you would have had the opportunity to meet him.
The bottom line is, we are trying to hire a superintendent who can bring academic achievement to this district, while controlling costs. Have you watched the candidate forum on TV Middletown? As a parent, what are your views on whether Mr. Rasmussen would be a good superintendent? (I don't know if you are aware, but I have 3 children in the district as well. I have a direct stake in seeing the schools improve).
Marcia Andrew
|
Posted By: randy
Date Posted: Jan 11 2010 at 11:40am
|
Bobbie, no need to go to TVMiddletown, you can view the forum here.
http://www.middletownusa.com/view_news.asp?a=4829 - Greg Rasmussen Hopeful Middletown City School's Superintendent
http://www.middletownusa.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=2514 - Greg Rasmussen Video ------------- Call me for a www.CameraSecurityNow.com" rel="nofollow - www.CameraSecurityNow.com quote 513-422-1907 x357 |
Posted By: randy
Date Posted: Jan 11 2010 at 11:47am
|
I did attend Friday's forum and was pleased with some of the answers I heard from Mr. Rasmussen. Think he would be a a fit...JMO
I will say this kids or no kids will all have a stake in the school system. ------------- Call me for a www.CameraSecurityNow.com" rel="nofollow - www.CameraSecurityNow.com quote 513-422-1907 x357 |
Posted By: Bobbie
Date Posted: Jan 11 2010 at 11:54am
| Ms Andrews - you are jumping the gun by stating I was not there - I was. Please read carefully, I asked why the forum was set up for no questions. Many people in the community also do not agree with the way things were handled by the BoE. I am sure just as many as you say do. I would even venture to say if you asked individuals they would agree with you and then tell others they do not. By your remark about "open mike" and side tracking - you must not think to highly of alot of the citizens in Middletown. As I take offense to that. A question you might have - may not be important to me or my family, that does not mean it is any less irrelevant. I agree with your bottem line - I have no issues with Mr Rasmussen, not sure if he is the best candidate - as I was not privy to the other resumes to compare. But the BoE needs to have an open door policy. Will the BoE be more open? |
Posted By: tomahawk35
Date Posted: Jan 11 2010 at 10:57pm
|
To Andrews, just what do you mean when you call us the emeny? I hope you realize that you are speaking to the property owners and tax payers that you so desperately need when you want a levy pass. You using a term like that will surely create more enemies |
Posted By: Mike_Presta
Date Posted: Jan 12 2010 at 6:14am
I am here to get the ACCURATE version of events. My only interest is the TRUTH!!! ------------- “Mulligan said he ... doesn’t believe they necessarily make the return on investment necessary to keep funding them.” …The Middletown Journal, January 30, 2012 |
Posted By: Mike_Presta
Date Posted: Jan 12 2010 at 6:25am
|
Ms. Andrew: I am glad to hear that: “As to the facts, I think we are down to very minor details.” As I mentioned in earlier posts, I very much want to understand and believe the BoE’s version of the way this transpired. To that end, I have attempted to edit the last summary of my understanding: Forgive me, I guess that I am a tad slow. Let me be sure that I have this right: The BoE engaged a consultant (CSA), at a cost to the district in excess of $25K, to find suitable candidates for MCSD Superintendent. The consultant received about 80 resumes and, using the Board’s criteria, screened the group down to the thirty most appropriate. The consultant brought the resumes of about 30 candidates to Middletown where those thirty were short-listed to a group of eight, plus at least two alternates on or about November 21. After this meeting, all originals and copies (if any) of all resumes, along with all notes made by the BoE or any of the district’s staff, were collected by the consultant and the resumes were returned to the respective candidates. Then interviews were arranged with these eight candidates with the BoE, in Middletown, over the weekend of December 11. (It is unclear to me whether or not the BoE had access to resumes or their earlier notes or not during these interviews , or if the BoE was reminded of the identities of the interviewees.) At some point after these interviews, the BoE further shortened the list to three apparent finalists, “the Board” asked the finalists to provide their resumes directly to the BOARD. Mr. Sommers and Mr. Rasmussen apparently did so. However, Is this now correct, or are there still discrepancies between my understanding and the actual events? Also, can you clarify whether or not the BoE had available to them copies of the resumes of the eight candidates interviewed on December 11th and 12th, and if so, what happened to those resumes and any notes made by the BoE or any MCSD employees after those interviews ended?
Thank you once again for helping us to understand this convoluted process. ------------- “Mulligan said he ... doesn’t believe they necessarily make the return on investment necessary to keep funding them.” …The Middletown Journal, January 30, 2012 |
Posted By: Mike_Presta
Date Posted: Jan 12 2010 at 6:35am
|
Tomahawk: Exactly! In my humble opinion, the majority of the people who frequent this Forum are interested in "the TRUTH" and are often frustrated by the lack of communication between our elected/appointed officials and the citizenry. If this makes them see us as "the enemy" even though they are, by THEIR choice, the "public servants", so be it. When I was in high school (long before most of these folks) there was a required course called "Civics". In that course we were taught that the government, and all government officials, were accountable to THE PEOPLE.
Perhaps things changed after I graduated and I was too busy working to have heard the news. ------------- “Mulligan said he ... doesn’t believe they necessarily make the return on investment necessary to keep funding them.” …The Middletown Journal, January 30, 2012 |
Posted By: spiderjohn
Date Posted: Jan 12 2010 at 7:10am
|
We are the "enemy camp" in YOUR mind, Ms.Andrew?
As BoE pres, r u speaking for the entire board?
So--should the BoE be considered the "enemy camp" by those posting here?
I hab never loloked at it that way.
I know most of the BoE members, and have never considered ANY of them my enemy at any time.
Once again you talk down and denigrate the concerned citizen.
That is obviously your mindset, and it will cost you and the system(unfortunately) down the road.
|
Posted By: wasteful
Date Posted: Jan 12 2010 at 7:24am
|
Ms Andrew why are we the "enemy camp"? Is it because we don't sit here and stare at the walls and just nod in agreement with everything that the BOE and City does, as most Residents do? Is it because we want to ask questions and get answers to those questions? I mean really why are we the enemy?
I applaud your decision yesterday to proceed with Mr. Rasmussen and move this process forward. But like many others find the BOE's way of selecting a Super., rather odd. I also find it even harder to believe that Martin got so far in the process. without anyone saying, "wait a minute, something is wrong here." It would seem to mean that your process is flawed if Martin could get so far along with so many potential candidates.
This is what causes us to question what is going on along with the lack of progress in The school system. We all have a vested interest in a better school system and want the same thing........improvement.
Signed
The ENEMY CAMP
|
Posted By: Marcia Andrew
Date Posted: Jan 12 2010 at 1:26pm
|
Mr. Presta,
I believe that your edited summary is factually correct, with the one qualification that I do not have first-hand knowledge of exactly how Martin's resume and cover letter came to us, as I was not directly in that loop. I believe that he misunderstood Rev. Tyus' request and faxed it to Carney, Sandoe, who emailed it to Rev. Tyus.
At the first round of interviews, the candidates brought copies of their resumes with them, and took them home. Any personal notes taken by board members during those interviews were either retained or discarded by the board member.
I want to apologize for any offense taken by my "enemy camp" comment. No offense was intended. Then, as now, I put the phrase in quotes. What I meant was a reference to what I sense from posters on this website (and yes, I am generalizing right now; there are definitely exceptions) as an attitude of "us versus them" whenever government (city council and school board especially) are discussed. Other occasional posters have also noted this hostility in the past. Perhaps you and Tomahawk and Spiderjohn do not see this because you post here so frequently and have become used to it. This is just my perception and you don't have to agree with it; however, it's also not very productive to a dialogue to have 4 posters jump all over me for the use of 2 words. I'm here, I'm trying to answer your questions.
Marcia Andrew
|
Posted By: Marcia Andrew
Date Posted: Jan 12 2010 at 1:29pm
|
Spiderjohn, I do not speak for the entire board when I post here. Just myself. The other board members may or may not agree with every word I post here; I do not clear it with them before posting.
Marcia Andrew
|
Posted By: spiderjohn
Date Posted: Jan 12 2010 at 3:31pm
|
Fair enough, Ms.Andrew
Please remember that we are not opposition litigants.
We are concerned citizens of Middletown.
The voters who chose to put every BoE member in office.
The parents of the children in the Middletown School system.
The taxpayers watching our property values and city disintegrate before our eyes.
We want good schools.
We want a responsive, productive superintendant.
We want an open positive dialog with the BoE
We care about our children,schools, community and ourselves.
If you kick your dog every day, eventually he will get angry and bite you.
Please approach us as caring equals, and I would expect you to be treated similarly.
Maybe be the bigger person, and make the first step in that direction.
|
Posted By: Marcia Andrew
Date Posted: Jan 12 2010 at 3:54pm
|
Fair enough, Spiderjohn. I will remember that, if you will remember that I also am a member of all the categories you list. I am a also a voter, a concerned citizen, a parent and a taxpayer. I want good schools, a responsive, productive superintendent, and an open positive dialog with the community. Seems if we can agree on all of that, we can stay focused on the big picture. As to taking the first step, I thought I had, by joining this forum and trying to honestly answer questions.
Marcia Andrew
|
Posted By: spiderjohn
Date Posted: Jan 12 2010 at 5:57pm
|
Yes Ms.Andrew--you have made a very bold and encouraging step.
For that I congratulate and thank you.
My bad for not recognizing you as also being one of us, and expect to be treated accordlngly.
Please remember that we don't always agree or get along--lol
Welcome to this corner of our world!
|
Posted By: John Beagle
Date Posted: Jan 12 2010 at 6:12pm
|
I also want to thank President Andrew for coming on here and addressing people's concerns.
Good Luck Marcia, may we finally see progress under your leadership. ------------- http://www.johnbeagle.com/" rel="nofollow - John Beagle Middletown USA News of, for and by the people of Middletown, Ohio. |
Posted By: VietVet
Date Posted: Jan 12 2010 at 9:04pm
|
Ms.Andrew, I have some questions for you, if you would be so kind to address them.
1. Why do you think it has taken the past/current school board (s) so long to address the current situation with the Middletown schools as to proficiency test score failures? Middletown is always last in all categories in all grades when compared to surrounding school districts on the tests. 2. When the schools wanted new elementary schools built , why were they built as large as a small college campus when we have declining enrollment rates? 3. Why is it that when emergency levies are placed before the voters, we are told that this is an emergency and is meant to provide emergency operating money on a one time basis only, and we seem to always see this one time only levy become a renewal levy which eventually turns into a permanent levy and stays with us until the "end of time"? Please explain how this one time only becomes permanent. 4. In negotiations with the unions, why does the board and admin. always seem to give in to their demands? Is there ever a time when the board and admin. dictate the terms of the agreement or is it usually one-sided with the unions always getting what they want? 5. What is the board and admin. doing to change the climate of learning in the classroom? What is this school system doing to gain control of the schools again through a discipline program? Is there a plan in place to try a different method of teaching the students because the current method has not improved the results for more than 20 years. Isn't it about time we tried something new as to curriculum and teaching methods in the classroom? 6. Why do we need so many assistants in each school? Don't we have at least 3 assist. principals at the high school? If so, why so many? Isn't the manpower a little top heavy as to admin.? 7. Why are we paying such high property taxes (second highest in Butler County perhaps?????) and have some of the highest per pupil spending among the neighboring high schools, yet produce lower results in educating our kids? It would almost seem like the answer to educating is not to throw money at the problem, but rather adopt/change to a more results oriented program. 8. Since the district has a history of having problems getting parents to participate in the troubled students education, has the school board involved the courts and police in dealing with the problem parents? If so, has it been successful? Thanks in advance, if you choose to respond to these questions. |
Posted By: Marcia Andrew
Date Posted: Jan 12 2010 at 10:37pm
|
Viet Vet, I will try to answer your questions:
1. I have been on the Board for 4 years. I can't answer for before then. We have been addressing low achievement test scores the entire 4 years. The main emphasis has been on improving the quality of instruction in the classroom through a variety of means, including "professional learning communities" where teachers can share best practices with teachers from the same grades or subjects, and also look at testing data to figure out which specific areas of the tests the students are missing, so that they can focus on those areas. The results have not been as fast or as significant as we want, although there have been some small gains. Some school buildings had bigger gains than others. Comparing Middletown to the surrounding districts is a bit like comparing apples and oranges, because those districts have very different demographics than Middletown. However, having said that, we don't compare all that well to districts with similar student populations either (although we are not dead last). There are many other things we have been doing the last 4 years to raise student achievement levels but I can't go into them all (especially if you want any of the other questions addressed).
2. I was not on the Board when the plans were made for the new elementary schools. However, there was a lot of public input on how many schools, where, the design, etc. The choice was for neighborhood schools, somewhat larger (500 student capacity versus 300 to 350 each) (Roosevelt housed about 750 students) but the total number of elementary schools was reduced from 10 to 8 as part of the building plan. The larger size was intended to be more efficient, for example, only 8 elementary principals now, not 10. Most of the elementary schools have no assistant principal. The exceptions are the 2 schools with the biggest need. Also, the larger size was planned to have room for all-day kindergarden, which has now been mandated by the state.
3. Until 2009, most districts were forced into a box in choosing temporary levies, which the state of OHio calls emergency levies, because if they passed a permanent levy, the state would deduct the amount raised in the levy from the state share of school funding. The end result would be that although the taxpayer paid more in local taxes, the local school would not get more total revenue. Temporary levy funds do not reduce the state share of funding. I am not aware that I or any other spokesperson for the schools described the 2007 temporary levy renewal as a one-time thing.
4. Due to federal labor laws, we the Board are generally not allowed to disclose what goes on during union contract negotiations. The teachers unions (local, state and national) are very strong. However, no, they do not always get what they want.
5. See response to question 1. There have been many changes to curriculum and teaching methods. I'm not sure why you think nothing has changed in 20 years. In fact, there are many teachers who would say that too much was changed, and this is one of the reasons they were unhappy with the previous administration. The Board has also been focused on restoring discipline. Two years ago we collaborated to establish a joint committee on discipline and safety, with board members, teachers, administrators, and community members, to investigate and agree on solutions. Unfortunately this committee has not so far been particularly effective. This school year, the football coach was re-assigned to a position to deal with absences, tardies and skipping class at the high school, which is a big piece of the problem. These are just examples.
6. The high school has approx. 1800 students and I don't know how many teachers. One principal cannot effectively supervise that many students and evaluate and supervise that many teachers. A significant part of the job of an assistant principal is discipline. Same is true with the 2 middle schools. As to elementary, see above.
7. The kids in Middletown have greater needs and challenges than the surrounding schools. This means we qualify for more grant money (for example, federal Title I grants are determined by the percentage of kids on free and reduced lunch, which in Middletown is approaching 75%). These kids can all learn, but they (generally, I know there are exceptions both ways!!) start kindergarden already delayed, receive less parental support, and have many issues to deal with at home. 20% of our students are special needs of some degree. Personal aides, speech and other therapists, special ed teachers, all are required by federal law and dramatically increase the per student average cost.
8. The high school and each of the middle schools have a licensed police officer in the building, paid jointly by the schools and the police. The Journal actually had a long piece several months ago on court interventions with delinquent students and their parents. That article gave a sobering look at the uphill battle to get some of these kids engaged productively n the learning process.
Marcia Andrew
|
Posted By: tomahawk35
Date Posted: Jan 12 2010 at 11:08pm
| We post here so often because it is the only place( beside the voting polls)that our voices and concerns are hear. The city council isn't set up to answer any questions( omly a dummy would believe that) and just as a example I believe that someone just said that was no comments taken at your recent gathering because the reason was that comments would (in layman terms) hold up your process. If I depended so much on someone elses money you better believe that I wiould make time for them ,besides the amount levies that your board trys to past in this towm it seems to me you have more time than money in the first place. |
Posted By: tomahawk35
Date Posted: Jan 12 2010 at 11:35pm
|
One more thought that has occurred to me is how I notice that any time a council member or school board member comes on this board everyone seems to go out of their way to thank them. Well the way I see it , the collection of taxpayers on this board also need to be thank for the time they put on this board because I'm sure most are like me who hold down full time jobs , then have even more to take care of when they get home taking care of their families and property but find time to share their concerns and feelings and yes even suggestions on what direction this town is headed in.
We will not be taken lightly when are the ones that this town and school system depends on to foot a big part of the bill, like any good consumer we want what we pay for and we will not tolerate anything less like we have been receiving. It way past time for the city and school system to starting producing a buyable product.
|
Posted By: randy
Date Posted: Jan 12 2010 at 11:57pm
|
Tomahawk35, you are right that the people that post on my site do indeed deserve to be thanked for all there great opinions and the voice they bring here, so thank you.
As for why members of council and school board get thanked by everyone, thats easy for me to answer being an admin here. Not many of them have the guts to come here and face the people of this town and take the time to answer questions. But when one does it is for a VERY brief moment. Most get bombarded with questions and accusations, most are warrented.
But when that happens most also leave and dont come back. I can tell exactly how many city officials have come here and answered questions, and thus far NONE have stuck around as long as Ms. Andrew nor have they answered as many questions as she has. For that she should be thanked.
My hope for MUSA is to build a place where the people in our town can get answers from the leaders of this city, so when one shows up and does answer the tough questions we should all respect that, to me that shows that they are different than most and are trying to be set up to answer questions. ------------- Call me for a www.CameraSecurityNow.com" rel="nofollow - www.CameraSecurityNow.com quote 513-422-1907 x357 |
Posted By: Mike_Presta
Date Posted: Jan 13 2010 at 6:31am
|
Ms. Andrew: Thank you so much! At last I think I have enough information to make my point. I plead for you to stay with me until the end before you draw your conclusions. I believe that your edited summary is factually correct, with the one qualification that I do not have first-hand knowledge of exactly how Martin's resume and cover letter came to us, as I was not directly in that loop. I believe that he misunderstood Rev. Tyus' request and faxed it to Carney, Sandoe, who emailed it to Rev. Tyus.
At the first round of interviews, the candidates brought copies of their resumes with them, and took them home. Any personal notes taken by board members during those interviews were either retained or discarded by the board member.
Then, on December 16, we read Rev. Tyus’s letter. His letter verifies some (granted, not all) of the information previously reported by The Journal, but refuted NONE! (What might a reasonable person infer from this? Remember, you are looking at this from the common citizen‘s point of view.) Next, in January, finally armed with at least the names of the three finalists, concerned citizens go to work and find some connection between Rev. Tyus (the now former president of the BoE) and one of the finalists, Mr. Martin. Perhaps they even recall a couple of years back, when, as part of the Middletown Ministerial Alliance, he appeared before city council and demanded that the replacement for Kip Moore’s council seat be based with race as the primary criterion. Could it be only coincidence that Mr. Martin happened to be Afro-American and had prior dealings with Rev. Tyus, some people wondered. Then one of the three finalists, a local man, coincidently dropped out to accept a position that had been “drooped into his lap” about the same time the three finalists had been announced. And the other non-Afro-American candidate made the eight person short-list on the strength of a one-page resume! That is what we were told. That is the only information that was made available to us. That is what we were asked to believe. Is it possible for reasonable people aware of the way things work in Middletown to start thinking something seems “fishy”? Suddenly, Mr. Martin drops out of the race “for the kids” (a phrase that many citizens feel was less than forthrightly used during levy campaigns). It was at this point, Ms. Andrew, that I honestly did try to come up with any reasonable explanation for what had occurred that was upright, forthcoming, plausible, and did not involve at least one miracle, BASED ON: what we were told, the only information that was made available to us, and what we were asked to believe! Simply stated, I could find none. I believe that if you will review the situation, through our eyes, considering only what we were told, armed only with the information that was available to us, you will likewise find none. What we were asked to believe was flat out unbelievable. Please understand that I am not blaming you. I am not blaming anyone. I am asking you to simply understand. I realize that you have not been on the BoE forever. I realize that you were not the President when this started. I understand your situation. I ask you to understand ours. You seem to be an intelligent, reasonable woman who is capable of logic. If I came to you and told you only what the general public was told, and the only information available to you was the information available to us, and you did due diligence, and I still asked you to believe it, I daresay you would be insulted. If you then expressed your opinion on the matter, and someone suggested that by expressing your opinions, based on mainstream information, was akin to spreading “rumors”, you would might be doubly insulted. But don’t worry about that. This is not about me, and my feelings aren’t easily hurt. The point I am trying to put forth is for you to see the public’s point, from their viewpoint! If the public’s viewpoint is in error, that does not make it your fault, or even your responsibility to correct. But if the public’s viewpoint is in error, but is based on what they are told and the only information available to them, and they then reached a reasonable (but incorrect) conclusion, it is NOT the fault of the public! You were privy to the exact same information as the public. It appears, at least to me, that the BoE expected the public to process that information (some of which was confirmed and none of which was called to doubt by Rev. Tyus’s letter), to believe it, and to reach some irrational conclusions. You were also privy to additional information. You may have known that the conclusions actually were not irrational, but the public could not know that. Let me put forth a few opinions. You don’t have to agree--we are all entitled to our own opinions. These opinions might also include some interpretations of the law with which you disagree. That’s fine, too. Reasonable people often disagree. Starting at the beginning, first let me agree. Using a consultant is one of many perfectly acceptable ways to find a superintendent (or any other employee). Some may say that it is not the best way, but that is opinion and there is never any way to foretell which is “best”. All methods sometimes yield a good result, and sometimes a poor result. I believe that the BoE erred in their method of meeting with the consultant, and with the applicants. It is my opinion that ANYTIME a public body has a “prearranged discussion of public business by a majority of its members”, that is a public meeting of that body. I believe that the BoE should have scheduled single-purpose special meetings; notified the public of each of them; stated in the notification that upon opening the meeting, the board would go into executive session and that upon ending the executive session, the meeting would be adjourned; and stated the ONE (not a “laundry list” as city council does) allowable subject--e. g. the employment of a public employee--for going into executive session. The names of any candidates need not be included. I believe that individual notes taken during executive sessions are not part of the public record. Strictly speaking, applications and resumes may be, but you say that the BoE never kept any of those anyway. I don’t know that for certain. I’ve heard that you are an attorney. It should be a simple matter to look it up. The TRUTH is always your friend. If it had been handled this way, wiseacres like me would be defending public bodies, saying that they are acting properly, rather than railing about the misuse of the public trust. I want to apologize for any offense taken by my "enemy camp" comment. No offense was intended. Then, as now, I put the phrase in quotes. What I meant was a reference to what I sense from posters on this website (and yes, I am generalizing right now; there are definitely exceptions) as an attitude of "us versus them" whenever government (city council and school board especially) are discussed. Other occasional posters have also noted this hostility in the past. Perhaps you and Tomahawk and Spiderjohn do not see this because you post here so frequently and have become used to it. This is just my perception and you don't have to agree with it; however, it's also not very productive to a dialogue to have 4 posters jump all over me for the use of 2 words. I'm here, I'm trying to answer your questions. PS: Also, "quotation marks rules" are followed very loosely here, especially in regards to indicating irony, expressing sentiment or adages, "etc.". A more surefire way might be the use of "emoticons," "if you know what I mean  "  !------------- “Mulligan said he ... doesn’t believe they necessarily make the return on investment necessary to keep funding them.” …The Middletown Journal, January 30, 2012 |
. (Not on this board, but in their official capacities.) Posted By: VietVet
Date Posted: Jan 13 2010 at 7:07am
|
Ms. Andrew. Thank you so much for your quick response to these questions. It is appreciated. Some feedback......
1. We may not be able to compare our district to Springboro and some of the other "more upscale/different demograhic towns" than Middletown, but we certainly can compare Midd. to Hamilton. How are our students performing versus their district? How about Franklin? Miamisburg? Similar towns ?? 2. The larger school size was intended to be more efficient. You mentioned number reductions of principals but how is building larger schools for less students more efficient? Not quite understanding that. Are we not allowing for a declining enrollment? Has these newer, more modern schools helped the performance as was one of the selling points when the district was trying to convince the voters to pass the bond levy to build them? I haven't seen any significant improvement as yet. Is it too early to make a call on this? 3. In the past, and with each emergency levy that is introduced, the school board usually starts selling the emergency levy to the voters by using the phrase- "it's a one time only deal" and "just to get us over the hump". Next thing we taxpayers know, it comes up for renewal indicating it was never intended to be a one time proposition for the voters AND, more than likely is headed to be a permanent levy proposal. Have seen this scenario several times. 4. Just seems like there is a feeling from the general public that the Teacher's Unions throughout the country is too powerful, has too much influence and seems to always do well in contract negotiations. Just looks like the school boards never take the hard line against them when each sits down at the negotiation table. 5. "I don't see why you think nothing has changed in 20 years"- Because I keep seeing kids "graduate" from our schools that can't read for understanding, do simple math like add, subtract, etc., can't write a paragraph with correct punctuation, spelling or grammar and can't seem to function when turned loose in the working environment. Basically, what we're pumping into the heads of the kids now, isn't necessarily preparing them for the real working world. 6. If a significant part of an assistant principals job is discipline (as you state), why is discipline so out of control at the high school and at the middle school levels? If this is their job function and it isn't producing good results, why not change the way they do their jobs, or find some assistant principals that will be more effective. IE-if it isn't working, you just don't live with it, you change it, don't you? 7. If we are incuring more cost for professionals to attend to these special groups, why is the city bringing in more "problems" through Section 8 for your schools to try and handle? Has the school board sat down with the city manager and her Section 8 people to discuss the negative impact her poverty program is having on your school system? If so, what were the results of the discussion and how is the city and the schools going to fix the problem? 8. If the high school and middle schools have a police officer in the hallways, why is there still so many issues with discipline and the rumor where "students run the schools and can do almost anything they want" at school? If true, the police officer program doesn't sound like it is too effective. Has there been discussion on an alternate plan? I would think that if the courts, the police and the schools made it so unpleasant for the problem parents, they would be glad to get their kid to school everyday. Apparently, the effort hasn't been severe enough to sway some parents. Time to rachet up the severity (as in jail time) for the parents. Again, thank you for your responses. It would take more time than would be allowed to discuss these matters in a regular school board meeting. I appreciate you taking the time to discuss them in this format. |
Posted By: kasson
Date Posted: Jan 13 2010 at 3:01pm
|
Mike,
In your last post you stated the BoE should have let the public know of the meetings, etc. I just want to tell you that they did. They scheduled meetings and did give a single purpose for the executive session. I was aware of the meetings and I don't even follow the schools that closely.
|
Posted By: Mike_Presta
Date Posted: Jan 13 2010 at 3:18pm
|
Kasson:
Thank you. I was unaware of that. I should have paid closer attention. Was It in The Journal?
If so, I stand corrected!! ------------- “Mulligan said he ... doesn’t believe they necessarily make the return on investment necessary to keep funding them.” …The Middletown Journal, January 30, 2012 |
Posted By: kasson
Date Posted: Jan 13 2010 at 3:26pm
|
VietVet,
Regarding the discipline issue you reference in your ?'s to Mrs. Andrew... I have had a child at MHS for the past 4 years. My child is in all advanced, honor and AP classes and there has never been even one issue as far as discipline in any of these classes. My child has seen fights and problems in the hallways when passing from class to class. There have been a very few "required for graduation" classes, like speech, health, etc. (like to call them "common courses" cause all kids have to take them to graduate) that my child has witnessed discipline problems in and kids skipping out of those classes and other problems with them. However, as I say every other class there has been absolutely no problems with.
|
Posted By: kasson
Date Posted: Jan 13 2010 at 3:30pm
|
Mike.
I don't know if it was in MJ or not cause I do not get the paper...cancelled my subscription about a year ago...it was a waste. It was listed on the school website and Tyus made reference to it at Boe meetings at the end when he gave "announcements".
|
Posted By: gemneye70
Date Posted: Jan 13 2010 at 3:50pm
|
I am a parent of one of the special needs students in the MCSD. While overall the district may rate lower than others around us, my wife and I have been very happy with the way our daughter's needs have been accomodated. We have a friend in Springboro, and they have not been so lucky. It may be a small victory, but there are things we can and should be proud of. |
Posted By: Mike_Presta
Date Posted: Jan 13 2010 at 4:04pm
|
Kasson:
I no longer have a child in the school system, so I seldom visit their website, nor do I watch every BoE meeting. If it wasn't in The Journal, that may explain why I missed it but it doesn't excuse the fact that I did. I do try to thoroughly research before I post on items such as this. Regardless, I do strive to be accurate and I thank you for correcting me.
I should probably go back and edit that post, but I think I'll let it stand--only in case someone has already read it and is preparing a "gotcha" response off-line. I'll go ahead and take my lumps. ------------- “Mulligan said he ... doesn’t believe they necessarily make the return on investment necessary to keep funding them.” …The Middletown Journal, January 30, 2012 |
Posted By: Mike_Presta
Date Posted: Jan 13 2010 at 4:08pm
|
*****BREAKING NEWS***** Power out in downtown MiddletownPresta errs in criticism of public officials. Celebration at City Hall overloads grid! ------------- “Mulligan said he ... doesn’t believe they necessarily make the return on investment necessary to keep funding them.” …The Middletown Journal, January 30, 2012 |
Posted By: wasteful
Date Posted: Jan 13 2010 at 5:45pm
Posted By: wasteful
Date Posted: Jan 13 2010 at 5:55pm
Seems there must be some issues somewhere:
Truancy Court referals by school district*2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 total Hamilton 122 185 234 273 265 1,079 Fairfield 71 146 174 12 82 593 Middletown 153 272 362 290 188 1,265 Lakota 45 61 74 66 49 295 Ross 8 8 7 9 12 44 Edgewood 9 27 34 28 26 124 New Miami 12 18 19 17 25 91 Monroe 9 12 13 13 16 63 Talawanda 1 45 39 21 35 153 Madison 2 11 6 1 5 25 *As of Nov. 18 |
Posted By: randy
Date Posted: Jan 13 2010 at 9:13pm
|
Ms. Andrew I was unaware how much a school board member made, $125 is less than I assumed, can I ask how many meetings you have in a year roughly, meetings that pay you? ------------- Call me for a www.CameraSecurityNow.com" rel="nofollow - www.CameraSecurityNow.com quote 513-422-1907 x357 |
Posted By: Marcia Andrew
Date Posted: Jan 13 2010 at 9:15pm
|
Mr. Presta,
Yes, now that you have laid it out, I can see how you came to the conclusion you did about the timing of the selection of the three finalists. I still don't think it was the most plausible or reasonable conclusion based on the facts as you knew them, but I think I understand your viewpoint. Thank you for taking the time to explain.
As Kasson has already pointed out, the Board did give notice of all meetings with the search consultant. Each started as a public meeting, and the ones where we discussed particular candidates went into executive session, as noticed.
Marcia Andrew
|
Posted By: Marcia Andrew
Date Posted: Jan 13 2010 at 9:21pm
|
Kasson and Gemneye,
Thank you for sharing your positive experiences with the Middletown schools. I have a son who is a high school honors student, whose experiences at MHS so far has been similar to that described by Kasson. I also have a special needs daughter, who has always received caring, specialized attention to help her be successful.
Marcia Andrew
|
Posted By: Marcia Andrew
Date Posted: Jan 13 2010 at 10:03pm
|
VietVet,
1. Middletown does not do quite as well as Hamilton on state tests. Both districts are in Continuous Improvement, although Hamilton has a higher overall Performance Index, and more indicators met. However, Hamilton's student population is not quite as needy. Franklin and Miamisburg are both rated excellent, but the demographics of their student population is not even close:
Middletown: 70.3% white, 67.1 % free/reduced, 17.9% special needs
Hamilton: 76.6% white, 58.8% free/reduced, 16.5% special needs
Frankllin: 96.7% white, 36.5% free/reduced, 17.3% special needs
Miamisburg: 86.1% white, 29.6% free/reduced, 13.9 % special needs
Springfield: 63.3% white, 67% free/reduced, 16.5% special needs.
Springfield is fairly close in terms of the demographics and size. They are also in Continuous Improvement, 1 less indicator met than Middletown and a few points lower on the overall performance index.
2. Enrollment in the district has stabilized. I don't have official numbers for this school year, but I don't think it declined, and it did not decline last year either. The 8 remaining elementary schools are well-utilized--visit them and you will not find empty classrooms. Some grades in some buildings are actually oversubscribed. The district had to build based on projections it had at the time, and projections are only that, they are not guarantees.
3,4,5: I stand by my original answers.
6. I agree, if something isn't working, it should be changed. Where we disagree is your assumption that because results haven't changed, its business as usual. There have been changes in the job expectations of assistant principals, as well as some changes in the faces filling those jobs.
7. The huge increase in Section 8 housing in Middletown is really a question for city council, not the BOE. The BOE did raise this concern with City Council. There response has been that the increase did not occur on their watch, and now that the people are here, they can't just kick them out on the street.
8. Police officers in the secondary schools is just one element of an approach to discipline that includes multiple levels of intervention. Thanks to Wasteful for posting some of the data from the Journal article I was referring to in my previous post. You can see from those numbers that MCSD does resort to the courts when necessary and appropriate. The severity of the consequences imposed on parents by the courts is up to the courts and the state legislature, not the BOE. Truancy is just one example of the issues that are more likely to be present for kids from economically disadvantaged households; the lower referral numbers for Lakota and Fairfield is some evidence of this phenomenom.
Thank you for the opportunity to answer your questions. I appreciate your interest in and concern for our schools.
Marcia Andrew
|
Posted By: kasson
Date Posted: Jan 14 2010 at 1:11am
|
Wasteful,
I cannot answer your question as to why less than half of the students feel safe in school; I can only tell you my family's experiences and believe me, I would not send my child to MHS if I didn't feel as if she were safe.
What we have experienced over the last 4 years is that MHS almost has a high school within a high school. The better performing kids are placed in advanced classes as freshmen, then can take a honors math class and AP American History as a sophomore, filling out their schedule with advanced classes. Then as a junior they can take almost all honors (there are only 4 offered), and AP classes. As a senior, again more AP, honors and/or the PSEO at MUM. Because of this all of the higher performing students have almost all their classes together. These are kids that care about learning, generally have parents that are involved in their child's education, and plan on going to college. They are the "good" kids (at least most of them), they are heavily involved in extracurriculars, and volunteer in the community. They respect their parents (most of the time :)) and their teachers. There are little to no disclipine problems with these kids. These are the kids that are hardly ever absent or tardy. These are the kids you do not hear about. Why? Because they don't create problems and just go about their business. There is nothing newsworthy to report about them. They do what you would expect every child to do. There are alot of these kids at MHS, more than you would guess, you just don't hear about them. You only hear about the troublemakers. Why? Because they make the news, in one way or another.
Now about the test scores...exactly what Mrs. Andrew and alot of others have been saying...as your socioeconomic profile goes down so do your test scores. It is a proven fact. MCSD is inundated with low socioeconomic kids (70% plus free and reduced lunch). These kids are in so-called "regular" classes, could care less about learning, are discipline problems, skip class, etc. ( I am of course, generalizing). Who I feel sorry for is the kid who is in "regular" classes who really wants to learn and has all these troublemakers in there that are causing problems.
As an example, in order to graduate all kids must take health, speech, phys. ed., a tech course, etc. So in these classes they mix all ability levels, so there are the highest performing kids in the same class as the troublemakers. This was a real "eye opener" for us. My child came home with reports of kids yelling cuss words at teachers, walking out of class and the worst- throwing chairs and desks across the room and kids having to duck in order not to be hit! Those classes were a waste bbecause the teachers spent all their time disciplining students and not teaching. My child did her homework for other classes in those classes. The exception was P.E. as my child took that in summer school for two summers. In my opinion, those classes should be segregated, just like the academics.
So, the moral of the story, so to speak, is yes, once again Section 8 and all the poverty in this town and this is not the BOE's domain, it is your city council!!!
|
Posted By: kasson
Date Posted: Jan 14 2010 at 1:53am
| Another tidbit... how many of your city council members attended a public school?...how many sent their kids to public school?...or their grandkids??? |
Posted By: Mike_Presta
Date Posted: Jan 14 2010 at 5:42am
|
Mr. Presta, Yes, now that you have laid it out, I can see how you came to the conclusion you did about the timing of the selection of the three finalists. I still don't think it was the most plausible or reasonable conclusion based on the facts as you knew them, but I think I understand your viewpoint. Thank you for taking the time to explain. Ms. Andrew: Thank you for taking the time and having the patience to hear me out. I realize that I have a tendency to be quite verbose. I would really be interested in hearing the more “plausible or reasonable conclusion based on the facts” as we knew them, but this is not the time or the place. Perhaps if we are ever stuck waiting at some local civic event you will favor me with more detail on that position. I am pleased that I was able to present our “case” well enough at least for you to understand our viewpoint. By this point, most others from the “city hall side”, would have called us kooks, crazy bloggers, nutty conspiracy theorists, or liars, or would have simply disappeared. Should there ever be an occasion that you wonder how those from the “crazy blogger camp As Kasson has already pointed out, the Board did give notice of all meetings with the search consultant. Each started as a public meeting, and the ones where we discussed particular candidates went into executive session, as noticed. Yes, and as I stated, that is exactly how it should have been to the best of my understanding of the law. Even though I was unaware of those facts, I already acknowledged this as an error on my part, and I do apologize. It does not surprise me that I missed the notices on the District web site, or that I didn’t watch the announcements at the end of the regular board meetings. I am quite surprised that I saw nothing in The Journal, either before or after either event noting that these would be special meetings for executive sessions. (The point being that I read both the e-Journal and the print version daily. Maybe they put it in the Sports section? Regards, Mike Presta ------------- “Mulligan said he ... doesn’t believe they necessarily make the return on investment necessary to keep funding them.” …The Middletown Journal, January 30, 2012 |
Posted By: Pacman
Date Posted: Jan 14 2010 at 6:45am
| Kasson, do the Student and the Parents determine if a Child is going the AP Course route? Been a while since I was in High School and back then you basically had the Academic Route, AP, or you took the Auto Shop, etc. route, which is no longer offered in High Schools? |
Posted By: Pacman
Date Posted: Jan 14 2010 at 6:59am
|
Ms. Andrew:
Kasson states:
"As an example, in order to graduate all kids must take health, speech, phys. ed., a tech course, etc. So in these classes they mix all ability levels, so there are the highest performing kids in the same class as the troublemakers. This was a real "eye opener" for us. My child came home with reports of kids yelling cuss words at teachers, walking out of class and the worst- throwing chairs and desks across the room and kids having to duck in order not to be hit! Those classes were a waste bbecause the teachers spent all their time disciplining students and not teaching. My child did her homework for other classes in those classes. The exception was P.E. as my child took that in summer school for two summers. In my opinion, those classes should be segregated, just like the academics. So, the moral of the story, so to speak, is yes, once again Section 8 and all the poverty in this town and this is not the BOE's domain, it is your city council!!!"
This is a major part of the problem in MCSD. Now at the last Combined meeting of the MCSD and the City Council this issue was brought up by I believe you and Mr. Fiora, if I remember correctly, and the City Council, Marconi in particular just glossed over the issue and the bottom line is that now according to Marconi we have or they are striving for the best Section 8 program around. Now this hardly addresses the problem or the fact that Middletown City Council and Admin have placed the City and the MCSD in a very poor position with Excessive poverty, Section 8 and Public Housing.
What can be done between the City residents and the MCSD to impress upon the City Council and City Admin the seriousness of this matter and that it needs to be addressed so that the City and the MCSD can improve in the future? Simply having the best Section 8 program in the word is fine and not the issue or answer to the problem, it is just sugar coating the problem. Excessive Section 8 for a city the size of Middletown is the issue which the City Admin and Council ignore for the most part and refuse to deal with.
|
Posted By: VietVet
Date Posted: Jan 14 2010 at 7:04am
| Thank you Ms. Andrew for your information. I appreciate your efforts to inform us on the various topics. |
Posted By: Marcia Andrew
Date Posted: Jan 14 2010 at 1:29pm
|
Pacman,
I think you and I agree on the Section 8 issue. You are correct that Mr. Fiora and I raised it at the last joint meeting with City Council. I tried to make the point that the dramatic increase in Section 8 vouchers has had a substantial negative impact on the city's schools, since socio-economic status is the single most determinative factor in how kids perform in school. I am not trying to tell Council how to do their jobs, I understand that there are many factors that they must consider in figuring a way out of the current over-supply of vouchers. I wanted them to understand how it has made the schools' job harder, and I'm not sure they all understood or agreed with my point.
To answer your specific question, I do not know what we can do to convince council of the importance of this issue. Having a "good program" may solve crime and other issues for the city, but it doesn't address the imbalance of low- or no-income residents (which harms not only the schools, but the whole city).
Marcia Andrew
|
Posted By: spiderjohn
Date Posted: Jan 14 2010 at 2:36pm
|
Virtually everyone has the same opinion here except for Council/Admin.
I don't look for them to change anything, and actually expect the # of vouchers to INCREASE.
The effect on the school system is hardly lost to the citizenry, and the effects on our business community have also been devastating, (particularly west of Breiel Blvd.).
When the ggovt.subsidy $$ runs out after the first week of each month, the recipients have literally no $$ to spend until the following month. Compund this issue by not having employment options available, and many recipients not being able/capable to hold employment of any type regardless.
Nothing against the Section 8 voucher holders at all.
They are simply using a service offered.
A problem being that this situation here is so well-known throughout the area(and beyond), that we have attracted people from everywhere.
This situation was created by our planning dept. I believe, and filtered through numerous city managers and Councils/Commissions with everyone involved either a willing participant or asleep at the wheel.
The buck stops downtown.
I have tried to discuss this issue with everyone from Council to Admin(specifically Economic Development), however I cannot even get anyone to take an appointment or listen.
|
Posted By: Mike_Presta
Date Posted: Jan 14 2010 at 8:10pm
|
Spider:
Exactly! It is the mindset of MMF and city hall to speak only of the "good" things about Middletown, ignore the problems, and attack those who attempt to bring the problems to the light of day.
They cannot distinguish the difference between reality and negativity. They malign and ostracize those who attempt to address real problems but celebrate and elevate those who "paint and party".
A good coat of paint (like a good layer of make-up  ) can hide a lot of defects, but the next morning, nothing has really changed.------------- “Mulligan said he ... doesn’t believe they necessarily make the return on investment necessary to keep funding them.” …The Middletown Journal, January 30, 2012 |