Just a week or so ago ..
ABC News reported:
The audit by the inspector general's office of the Reading First program — the largest early reading program in U.S. history — found that officials in 2002 and 2003, shortly after the program was established, improperly tried to influence states on which curricula they should use.
In addition, some officials with the power to approve certain reading materials for states had connections with the publishers, according to the report. It added the department had not properly reviewed the officials for such potential conflicts.
The Associated Press similarly had the news:
A scorching internal review of the Bush administration's billion-dollar-a-year reading program says the Education Department ignored the law and ethical standards to steer money how it wanted.
The government audit is unsparing in its view that the Reading First program has been beset by conflicts of interest and willful mismanagement. It suggests the department broke the law by trying to dictate which curriculum schools must use.
Interestingly, the Fort Worth weekly newspaper (appropriately named, FW Weekly) had all this story last January:
... in spite of all of the millions that have poured into the district for new reading programs since 1998, reading scores for most Fort Worth students have not improved.
Entrepreneurs of every stripe, it seems, have realized in the last decade or so that schools are not just places where scholars and future presidents are made. They are places were fortunes can be made — especially with a few friends in the right places.
Why do we care?
Only because the program in question is called Voyager Expanded Learning -- and is the the reading project the Lancaster ISD has been counting on ever since Dr Lewis arrived.
There is absolutely no indication or evidence that the people who decided to switch from whatever reading program they formerly used, to Voyager, pocketed or profited personally from the switch.
Mostly, they just reacted to the availability of federal funds; and the attractions of the educational "fad du jour" .
It's just that when the industry THIS year is dangling Bill Gates' grant money out there for districts that MIGHT consider adding more PCs to their portfolio of educational resources ... one wonders if proposals to offer laptops to kindergardners are really driven by desire for academic excellence, or a hope of latching onto some more free money.
Saturday, September 30, 2006
Touchy topic.
Illegal immigration is getting a lot of attention in both national and local politics. The city of Farmers Branch embarrassed itself even talking about it. So I anticipate some outrage with this next topic. But we need to face reality squarely and, as Dr Lewis always says, Get the Facts.
Texas State Law and the Lancaster ISD enrollment policy are conflicted about legal residency and citizenship. On the one hand, local policy dictates:
DOCUMENTATION
If a parent or other person with legal control of a child enrolls the child in a District school, the parent or other person, or the school district in which the child most recently attended school, shall furnish to the District all of the following:
The child's birth certificate, or another document suitable as proof of the child's identity as defined by the Commissioner of Education in the Student Attendance Accounting Handbook;
and, from that handbook
Student Requirements include the following:
Social Security Card,
Birth Certificate
...
Lancaster ISD will prosecute any parent who falsifies document for purposes of attending LISD.
On the other hand, the SAME policy advices:
Denying enrollment to children who are not legally admitted into the United States violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Plyler v. Doe, 457 U.S. 202 (1982)
So, the problem is, do students attending LISD schools who are not legally resident or citizens of the United States and Texas "count" toward the Average Daily Attendance?
If district average attendance is about 6000 students and even 1% of these students are challenged by the TEA for legal residency, how much money does the district lose?
Is the district building any allowance whatever into their annual budgets for the possibilty that their ADA numbers might be so challenged?
Can they then support their maintenance and operations budget, which depends so heavily on state funding based on that ADA, if the ADA turned out to be wrong?
And if they ARE worried about it, would they be upfront about the problem or bury the deficit in the bond programs Interest and Sinking fund budget?
Something to think about as you try to Get the Facts.
Illegal immigration is getting a lot of attention in both national and local politics. The city of Farmers Branch embarrassed itself even talking about it. So I anticipate some outrage with this next topic. But we need to face reality squarely and, as Dr Lewis always says, Get the Facts.
Texas State Law and the Lancaster ISD enrollment policy are conflicted about legal residency and citizenship. On the one hand, local policy dictates:
DOCUMENTATION
If a parent or other person with legal control of a child enrolls the child in a District school, the parent or other person, or the school district in which the child most recently attended school, shall furnish to the District all of the following:
The child's birth certificate, or another document suitable as proof of the child's identity as defined by the Commissioner of Education in the Student Attendance Accounting Handbook;
and, from that handbook
Student Requirements include the following:
Social Security Card,
Birth Certificate
...
Lancaster ISD will prosecute any parent who falsifies document for purposes of attending LISD.
On the other hand, the SAME policy advices:
Denying enrollment to children who are not legally admitted into the United States violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Plyler v. Doe, 457 U.S. 202 (1982)
So, the problem is, do students attending LISD schools who are not legally resident or citizens of the United States and Texas "count" toward the Average Daily Attendance?
If district average attendance is about 6000 students and even 1% of these students are challenged by the TEA for legal residency, how much money does the district lose?
Is the district building any allowance whatever into their annual budgets for the possibilty that their ADA numbers might be so challenged?
Can they then support their maintenance and operations budget, which depends so heavily on state funding based on that ADA, if the ADA turned out to be wrong?
And if they ARE worried about it, would they be upfront about the problem or bury the deficit in the bond programs Interest and Sinking fund budget?
Something to think about as you try to Get the Facts.
Confirming the option for students to transfer.
As Dr Lewis always says: Get the Facts.
From TodayNewspapers.Net 's always interesting Steve Synder:
Parents of junior high students can request a transfer to another school with which the district has a cooperative agreement on the district's dime. And the district had to set aside 10 percent of its Title I federal money, about $100,000, to pay for any transfer costs.
Boy, wouldn't it sure relieve over-crowding in the Lancaster District if every parent who actually cared about his or her kids pulled their kids out of those failing schools?
Not that I'm exactly recommending that, but just for discussion...
As Dr Lewis always says: Get the Facts.
From TodayNewspapers.Net 's always interesting Steve Synder:
Parents of junior high students can request a transfer to another school with which the district has a cooperative agreement on the district's dime. And the district had to set aside 10 percent of its Title I federal money, about $100,000, to pay for any transfer costs.
Boy, wouldn't it sure relieve over-crowding in the Lancaster District if every parent who actually cared about his or her kids pulled their kids out of those failing schools?
Not that I'm exactly recommending that, but just for discussion...
"Bursting at the seams"
Dr Lewis tells us the elementary schools are "bursting at the seams". If you don't believe him, well, look at the portables around each facility.
What he DOESN'T like to point out is that he has an alternative.
In May this year he was upfront about it with Herb Booth of the Dallas Morning News in this interview:
" In the meantime, Dr Lewis said the current fourth-grade center, the former Lancaster High School East Campus for freshmen, could be used in the fall as an overflow elementary school or as a sixth-grade center for the middle school."
But in fact, now that fall has arrived and the district needs seats, the East Campus is sitting empty.
Why?
It seems to be about the seams. If the East Campus were in use, we wouldn't need portables. If we didn't need portables, we wouldn't seem to be bursting at the seams. And if we weren't bursting at the seams, we wouldn't vote for the upcoming tax increase.
Dr Lewis tells us the elementary schools are "bursting at the seams". If you don't believe him, well, look at the portables around each facility.
What he DOESN'T like to point out is that he has an alternative.
In May this year he was upfront about it with Herb Booth of the Dallas Morning News in this interview:
" In the meantime, Dr Lewis said the current fourth-grade center, the former Lancaster High School East Campus for freshmen, could be used in the fall as an overflow elementary school or as a sixth-grade center for the middle school."
But in fact, now that fall has arrived and the district needs seats, the East Campus is sitting empty.
Why?
It seems to be about the seams. If the East Campus were in use, we wouldn't need portables. If we didn't need portables, we wouldn't seem to be bursting at the seams. And if we weren't bursting at the seams, we wouldn't vote for the upcoming tax increase.
As long as we're all admiring Josh Benton,
Go look at his article on parents who transfer their kids to great charter schools. And the parents who don't.
Did you realize that Lancaster's Junior High is rated "Academically Unacceptable" by the Texas Education Agency? Why? Well, check out the comments at the GreatSchools.net site
(August 2006) My daughter has been at the Junior High for the past 2 years. She's never passed any part of the TAKS test and I don't see where they did anything to improve that. I agree that the teachers attendance is poor. Even though in some classes she was supposed to have a regular teacher she continously had subs.
(June 2006)"My son attended Lancaster Jr High for both 7th and 8th grade much to my regret.This district is in the worst shape as far as academics are concerned. "
(August 2005) " I have been greatly disappointed with the unprofessionalism of staff within the LISD Administrative Department as well as the previous principal of the junior high school. I have communicated with the principal and several instructors and I was disheartened by their lack of knowledge or willingess to share information on basic procedures. ... My property taxes are too high to accept such unprofessionalism."
(August 2005) " ... The teachers absenteeism was just as high as the students. I spoke with the assistant principle on several occasions and found him to be very unprofessional. My overall view of the school is very poor. My child will not be attending LISD every again. I am willing to sacrifice and pay for private school to help ensure her a proper education."
Anyhow, go read the other comments.
The point is, parents are ENTITLED BY LAW to pull their children out of such unacceptable schools. And have them enrolled in a better school, such as the KIPP Academy charter schools mentioned in the Benton article. This is free -- you're entitled to a state-funded education in an acceptable school, and if your local district can't provide one you may pick another school.
As Superintendent Lewis likes to say, Get the Facts.
In 1995, the Texas Legislature created the Public Education Grant (PEG) program [TEC §§29.201 - 29.205].
-- The PEG list identifies schools at which 50 percent or more of the students did not pass TAKS in any two of the preceding three years
-- Districts must notify each parent of a student in the district assigned to attend a school on the PEG list
-- Parents obtain a transfer by contacting the district the student desires to transfer to, in writing. The letter they have received from the home district, as well as the PEG list, provides adequate justification for the transfer request.
-- Parents may request a transfer under the PEG program any time during the 2006-07 school year.
A list of middle schools in Dallas County which might offer junior high students a better opportunity than the "Unacceptable" Lancaster ISD Junior High:
School Name Accountability rating
Lancaster Junior High School Academically Unacceptable
Highland Park Middle School Exemplary
William B Travis Middle School Exemplary
Aw Brown-Fellowship Charter Exemplary
McCulloch Intermediate School Exemplary
Coppell Middle North Exemplary
Coppell Middle East Exemplary
Ronald Reagan Middle School Recognized
Parkhill Junior High School Recognized
Children First of Dallas Recognized
Peak Academy Recognized
Irma Lerma Rangel Recognized
H Bob Daniel Senior Intm Recognized
Richardson North Jr High Recognized
B G Hudson Middle School Recognized
George B Dealey Middle Recognized
Grace R Brandenburg Intm Recognized
W H Atwell Middle School Recognized
W E Greiner Middle School Recognized
Apollo Junior High School Recognized
Austin Acad for Excell Recognized
Life School Red Oak Recognized
Westwood Junior High School Recognized
Henry W Longfellow Academy Recognized
Dallas Environmental Science Recognized
North Hills School Recognized
Coppell Middle West Recognized
Blalack Middle School Recognized
Kimbrough Middle School Recognized
St. Anthony Academy Recognized
Brandenburg Middle School Recognized
Webb Middle School Recognized
Polk Middle School Recognized
Lamar Middle School Recognized
Harry Stone Montessori Recognized
Perry Middle School Recognized
Field Middle School Recognized
Austin Middle School Recognized
Go look at his article on parents who transfer their kids to great charter schools. And the parents who don't.
Did you realize that Lancaster's Junior High is rated "Academically Unacceptable" by the Texas Education Agency? Why? Well, check out the comments at the GreatSchools.net site
(August 2006) My daughter has been at the Junior High for the past 2 years. She's never passed any part of the TAKS test and I don't see where they did anything to improve that. I agree that the teachers attendance is poor. Even though in some classes she was supposed to have a regular teacher she continously had subs.
(June 2006)"My son attended Lancaster Jr High for both 7th and 8th grade much to my regret.This district is in the worst shape as far as academics are concerned. "
(August 2005) " I have been greatly disappointed with the unprofessionalism of staff within the LISD Administrative Department as well as the previous principal of the junior high school. I have communicated with the principal and several instructors and I was disheartened by their lack of knowledge or willingess to share information on basic procedures. ... My property taxes are too high to accept such unprofessionalism."
(August 2005) " ... The teachers absenteeism was just as high as the students. I spoke with the assistant principle on several occasions and found him to be very unprofessional. My overall view of the school is very poor. My child will not be attending LISD every again. I am willing to sacrifice and pay for private school to help ensure her a proper education."
Anyhow, go read the other comments.
The point is, parents are ENTITLED BY LAW to pull their children out of such unacceptable schools. And have them enrolled in a better school, such as the KIPP Academy charter schools mentioned in the Benton article. This is free -- you're entitled to a state-funded education in an acceptable school, and if your local district can't provide one you may pick another school.
As Superintendent Lewis likes to say, Get the Facts.
In 1995, the Texas Legislature created the Public Education Grant (PEG) program [TEC §§29.201 - 29.205].
-- The PEG list identifies schools at which 50 percent or more of the students did not pass TAKS in any two of the preceding three years
-- Districts must notify each parent of a student in the district assigned to attend a school on the PEG list
-- Parents obtain a transfer by contacting the district the student desires to transfer to, in writing. The letter they have received from the home district, as well as the PEG list, provides adequate justification for the transfer request.
-- Parents may request a transfer under the PEG program any time during the 2006-07 school year.
A list of middle schools in Dallas County which might offer junior high students a better opportunity than the "Unacceptable" Lancaster ISD Junior High:
School Name Accountability rating
Lancaster Junior High School Academically Unacceptable
Highland Park Middle School Exemplary
William B Travis Middle School Exemplary
Aw Brown-Fellowship Charter Exemplary
McCulloch Intermediate School Exemplary
Coppell Middle North Exemplary
Coppell Middle East Exemplary
Ronald Reagan Middle School Recognized
Parkhill Junior High School Recognized
Children First of Dallas Recognized
Peak Academy Recognized
Irma Lerma Rangel Recognized
H Bob Daniel Senior Intm Recognized
Richardson North Jr High Recognized
B G Hudson Middle School Recognized
George B Dealey Middle Recognized
Grace R Brandenburg Intm Recognized
W H Atwell Middle School Recognized
W E Greiner Middle School Recognized
Apollo Junior High School Recognized
Austin Acad for Excell Recognized
Life School Red Oak Recognized
Westwood Junior High School Recognized
Henry W Longfellow Academy Recognized
Dallas Environmental Science Recognized
North Hills School Recognized
Coppell Middle West Recognized
Blalack Middle School Recognized
Kimbrough Middle School Recognized
St. Anthony Academy Recognized
Brandenburg Middle School Recognized
Webb Middle School Recognized
Polk Middle School Recognized
Lamar Middle School Recognized
Harry Stone Montessori Recognized
Perry Middle School Recognized
Field Middle School Recognized
Austin Middle School Recognized
Link to DMN columnist Joshua Benton's article on Computers.
An oldie but a goodie.
It’s pop quiz time. Fill in the blanks: What technological advances are these people talking about?
1. “I believe that _________ is destined to revolutionize our educational system.”
2. “The time may come when a _________ will be as common in the classroom as is the blackboard.”
3. “In our schools, every classroom in America must be ________.”
Put your pencils down.
The answers: 1. “The motion picture” (inventor Thomas Edison, 1922).
2. “Portable radio receiver” (educator William Levenson, 1945).
3. “Connected to the information superhighway” (President Bill Clinton, 1996).
My point? Every few decades, some new device comes along promising to be a cure-all for our educational ailments. And in just about every case, the results have fallen short of the revolution promised.
Read the whole thing.
An oldie but a goodie.
It’s pop quiz time. Fill in the blanks: What technological advances are these people talking about?
1. “I believe that _________ is destined to revolutionize our educational system.”
2. “The time may come when a _________ will be as common in the classroom as is the blackboard.”
3. “In our schools, every classroom in America must be ________.”
Put your pencils down.
The answers: 1. “The motion picture” (inventor Thomas Edison, 1922).
2. “Portable radio receiver” (educator William Levenson, 1945).
3. “Connected to the information superhighway” (President Bill Clinton, 1996).
My point? Every few decades, some new device comes along promising to be a cure-all for our educational ailments. And in just about every case, the results have fallen short of the revolution promised.
Read the whole thing.
Friday, September 29, 2006
Moulin Rouge -- the Original Feature!
I regret that last evening when I posted the archive from TODAY Newspapers that I couldn't find the link to the paper's own archive.
But now, we have that story, just as it appeared last August.
I don't know why it dropped out of the newspaper's open archives or the Google cache. Again, the whole thing is copyright to the author and publisher and is used here only for reference.
The concept of a corporate sponsered venture (though not a casino) combined with a school and sports arena has been tried up in Frisco. Their Pizza Hut Park is fascinating. I think we ought to have a separate referendum and vote on doing just a deal around here.
Let's just NOT try to do that deal in secret and borrow the money for such a project by claiming it's all about elementary schools.
I regret that last evening when I posted the archive from TODAY Newspapers that I couldn't find the link to the paper's own archive.
But now, we have that story, just as it appeared last August.
I don't know why it dropped out of the newspaper's open archives or the Google cache. Again, the whole thing is copyright to the author and publisher and is used here only for reference.
The concept of a corporate sponsered venture (though not a casino) combined with a school and sports arena has been tried up in Frisco. Their Pizza Hut Park is fascinating. I think we ought to have a separate referendum and vote on doing just a deal around here.
Let's just NOT try to do that deal in secret and borrow the money for such a project by claiming it's all about elementary schools.
Thursday, September 28, 2006
A neighbor who sent this by email now gives me permission to post his thoughts, here. ( Of course, comments are always welcome, too.)
---
Mr. Melcher,
Gallagher Constructions Co is embedded with the district. They need to have open bids when it comes down to bidding. Gallagher by tearing down schools that they built for free, the district will always give them the contract.
The district needs to build schools by actual students counts, not by building permits that are issued. Because the permits are issued doesn't mean that the house will be built. The district needs to renovated and add on the some of the schools.
At this point of time, the district wants to spend $8 million dollars to renovate the old High School Stadium for the Jr High, but the Jr High can use the same stadium as the High School without spending more money. The state has left Dr Lewis and LISD 4 more cents to up the tax rate without voters approval.
Dr. Lewis and the School Board think they're smart. If we approve the $211-$225 million dollars(no one knows the figure) he can raise $10 million more without our approval. I think the School Board is going to wait until we approve the $211 million and the raise the 4 cent to get extra $10 million. The School Board needs to spend no more than $60 millions to build 2 Elementary Schools and one Middle School. They said it costs $12 Million(by Dr. Lewis's figure) to build one Elementary School and $16 million to build one Middle School. That still leaves enough money to build a small maintenance facility and the rest to be saved for a rainy day fund and add extension to the old schools that are still needing rooms.
Herman Tucker
Meadowview
I appreciate the feedback from my neighbors and the community.
Anybody else want to share thoughts?
---
Mr. Melcher,
Gallagher Constructions Co is embedded with the district. They need to have open bids when it comes down to bidding. Gallagher by tearing down schools that they built for free, the district will always give them the contract.
The district needs to build schools by actual students counts, not by building permits that are issued. Because the permits are issued doesn't mean that the house will be built. The district needs to renovated and add on the some of the schools.
At this point of time, the district wants to spend $8 million dollars to renovate the old High School Stadium for the Jr High, but the Jr High can use the same stadium as the High School without spending more money. The state has left Dr Lewis and LISD 4 more cents to up the tax rate without voters approval.
Dr. Lewis and the School Board think they're smart. If we approve the $211-$225 million dollars(no one knows the figure) he can raise $10 million more without our approval. I think the School Board is going to wait until we approve the $211 million and the raise the 4 cent to get extra $10 million. The School Board needs to spend no more than $60 millions to build 2 Elementary Schools and one Middle School. They said it costs $12 Million(by Dr. Lewis's figure) to build one Elementary School and $16 million to build one Middle School. That still leaves enough money to build a small maintenance facility and the rest to be saved for a rainy day fund and add extension to the old schools that are still needing rooms.
Herman Tucker
Meadowview
-----
I appreciate the feedback from my neighbors and the community.
Anybody else want to share thoughts?
A couple of video links to news about Lancaster Schools
My neighbor Kevin Mondy is featured in this story about how his child's class in the brand new Houston Elementary was still being taught by a substitute teacher weeks after school has started. (Mr Mondy was still having this problem and reported it, again, to the board of trustees a week or so AFTER this news was originally broadcast.)
And I'm briefly seen in this story about potential voter fraud or mistakes in the May election for a position on the LISD Board of Trustees.
Check it out.
My neighbor Kevin Mondy is featured in this story about how his child's class in the brand new Houston Elementary was still being taught by a substitute teacher weeks after school has started. (Mr Mondy was still having this problem and reported it, again, to the board of trustees a week or so AFTER this news was originally broadcast.)
And I'm briefly seen in this story about potential voter fraud or mistakes in the May election for a position on the LISD Board of Trustees.
Check it out.
"Living the Vision" -- but WHOSE vision?
[The article is quoted entirely from the original work by Steve Snyder of the TODAY Newspaper -- Lancaster Edition, August 3, 2006. Presumably all copyright is retained by Today and Mr Synder. ]
[The article is quoted entirely from the original work by Steve Snyder of the TODAY Newspaper -- Lancaster Edition, August 3, 2006. Presumably all copyright is retained by Today and Mr Synder. ]
Lewis bets on hotel development
The Moulin Rouge in Lancaster?
Well, not exactly, but at least a hotel with Moulin Rouge -style cachet and
name, if Lancaster Schools Superintendent Larry Lewis has anything to say about
it.
From the time the city of Lancaster agreed to trade out land at the northwest
corner of Lancaster Community Park with the School District, Lewis has dreamed
of a motel at the northwest corner of the high school, beyond the traded out
land
area.
Well, with the right connections and the right contacts, what Lewis and the
school districts are calling "Enterprise City" has moved a little closer to
reality.
When saxophonist Kim Waters played at the city's May 6 Musicfest concert,
sponsored by radio station 107.5 FM The Oasis, Lewis met Sheila Green, a
consultant with the station. She, in turn, happened to know people from
Moulin Rouge Development Corporation, which bought Las Vegas' Moulin Rouge Hotel
and Casino in
2004.
The Moulin Rouge, a National Historic Landmark, got its place in history by
breaking the color line as Las Vegas' first integrated casino and hotel from the
day it opened its doors in 1955. In 1960, white and black leaders in the
city signed an agreement to officially abolish segregation on the Las Vegas
Strip.
And it's that history that Lewis sees as a draw, if the Moulin Rouge Development
Corporation would build a hotel on Dallas
Avenue.
Lewis said there's nothing wrong with Hilton or other upscale hotels, but that
he thinks the site needs a special
look.
"We've got to have something to draw the people, because we're not on a
highway," he
said.
Lewis sees the hotel, then as anchoring a development of various retail and
service businesses that would build on the hotel's traffic and
needs.
That whole complex, in turn, would connect to the new Lancaster High School in
two
ways.
One, it would offer a nearby hotel for when the portions of the high school are
rented out, such as the basketball gym, football gridiron or the track oval for
playoff games and other competitions. The same holds true if the schools
theater is rented out, or its cafeteria is rented out as a conference or meeting
room.
But, Lewis sees a more direct tie-in to the high school, which is why all of the
high school's vocational related classrooms, face west, toward the 18-acre
would-be hotel site. And that would be the possibility of students in the
computer, culinary arts, broadcast journalism, design, theater, cosmetology and
other classes getting the chance to work with staff and management at the hotel
complex, or else work on guest of the hotel, for things such as hair
styling.
"(It would) give kids the real world of work experience. If you have a
motel or food court over there, they can walk right on over," Lewis
said.
"And
that's what we're trying to get for these kids - connections and opportunities,"
Lewis
said.
He then, with a tour of the new high school facility, which is approaching
completion, showed in detail how this might work out, as well as illustrating
features of the new high
school.
The auditorium at the new high school has an orchestra pit and a prop
room. It also has acoustically designed walls, as do all fine arts
classrooms where necessary. And it has full-scale theater lighting with
control
room.
This part of the west wing of the high school also has a culinary arts classroom
with multiple full commercial sized pot sinks and other cleanup
areas.
It has a black box theater classroom with lights and control room, for teaching
theater tech
skills.
Likewise, it has a broadcast journalism studio, with full control panels and
equipment.
Besides the cosmetology classrooms, other technology-related classes include a
metal fabrication class, a design/materials/sewing classroom and multiple
computer and information technology classrooms.
Lewis stressed the amount of technological-related material in each teaching
area.
He said that, especially with minorities often having less access to, and less
comfort level with, technology than the public as a whole, this was important
for Lancaster students and their academic and career
future.
"We want them to be very comfortable with technology," he
said.
Beyond that, the high school in general has one other goal besides education in
the narrow sense, Lewis
said.
"We're
trying to prepare students academically and help them find out who they are
career-wise," he
said.
Lewis then took a few minutes to explain how he saw a hotel tying in with high
school athletic
facilities.
"We can hold NCAA and AAU track meets," Lewis said. He added that the
basketball gym and football stadium are both sufficient for UIL playoff
games.
"Our goal is to make the athletic department self-sufficient and put more
taxpayer dollars in the classrooms," he
said.
He added that this went beyond athletics, saying the new cafeteria, which had a
stage area built into it, could be rented out for conferences and
meetings.
Of
course, there's just one hitch -- getting the
land.
Lewis said the district has started talks with the trust that manages the
property, via commercial real estate agent Margie Waldrop, and the discussions
are ongoing.This makes me wonder... In May, Dr Lewis and the Lancaster District thought they could cope with demographic growth and the need to repair old buildings with a bond of $93 Million.
In July, Dr Lewis met up with the developers of the Moulin Rouge / Enterprise city project, and looked at some land deals.
And in August, Dr Lewis, and the District, start planning for projects totalling $215 Million -- over TWICE what they planned for in May.
Now, there is nothing at all, whatsoever in any way shape or fashion in the bond planning information suggesting that the district fund a vocational-technical hotel-convention center-high school.
But if the high school could get the land, they might consider it. And the bond projects DO forecast land acquisition.
There is nothing in the bond package about putting the second, expanded, high school on a site adjacent to the current new Tiger stadium -- much less making it a training center for careers in the hotel and entertainment industry.
But if they DID want to build such a school, nothing in the language of the referendum would restrict them. And the "vision" does, explicitly, refer to helping Lancaster High School students find careers as cooks, cosmetologists -- and presumably bus boys, bell boys, pool boys, shoe shine boys -- all the sorts of jobs where kids get to wear black slacks, white shirts, red vests and those little round hats ...
I honestly don't know. What kinds of jobs DOES the hotel industry offer teenagers?
Anyhow. Something changed between May and August. The only big idea I can find that's consistant with that time period, is this. Does anybody else have any other suggestions?
Tuesday, September 26, 2006
The District sent home with students a letter to their parents regarding the upcoming bond election.
The original letter will be quoted fully and exactly in italics, and my comments will be inserted in bold text.
August 29, 2006
Dear Lancaster ISD,
The Lancaster Independent School District Board of Trustees voted to call a school bond referendum election on Tuesday November 7, 2006.
Syntax matters. The board voted on August 28th. The election will be held November 7th.
The $215,000,000 referendum will occur in three phases as student growth occurs.
The referendum is the election. The election will occur, as stated above, on November 7th. Perhaps the referendum will pass. Perhaps not. If and only if the referendum passes might one or more BORROWING phases occur.
The $215 Million to be borrowed is NOT contingent upon student growth. Whether the students are three feet tall or grow to be seven feet tall, the amount the referendum authorizes to be borrowed is the same.
What the district clumsily intends to imply is that as the average number of students in daily attendance grows, more money will be borrowed. This is not accurate. Only if the Lancaster tax base grows may phases two or three become legally possible. If the housing bubble collapses or if anticipated commercial development falls through, the borrowing authorized by this election can not occur. That is, even if student attendance numbers rise; if development and taxable values fall, the 2nd and 3rd phases will not take place. Similarly, even if student attendance falls, but taxable valuations rise, the district CAN borrow and spend money that may be authorized by this referendum.
The capital needs assessment for the November 2006 referendum began with a Citizens Bond/ Faculty Committee and included a review of facilities, expenditures and needs by citizens.
The Citizens'/Facility Bond Committee met three times for a total of about seven hours. One hour of that time was spent providing Superintendent Lewis an audience to discuss the May 2006 election. Another hour provided consultant Red Whiddon a similar audience while he assured all committee members the $110 Million borrowed in 2004 was accounted for -- though he also informed that committee he was neither an accountant nor auditor. Two hours were spent touring buildings. Another, providing an audience for staffers from the city Planning and Zoning commission discuss housing permit processes and statistics.
The citizens did not develop the needs assessment. Those documents were developed by non-citizens; including Red Whiddon, Von Gallagher, and Matt Boles.
The 50 residents involved in the process analyzed demographic information,
The committee was provided advertising from a demographic firm, Population And Survey Analysis, who had conducted a demographic survey for the district in 2003 and hoped to get another such contract. The data provided to the committee had not, in fact, been updated by PASE since their original survey. Demographic data from the TEA Region Ten was also provided. Whether or not individual committee members "analyzed" the data provided, there was no open discussion of the data as assembled by the district.
studied building evaluations,
There were no formal reports on any individual building provided to the committee or composed by the committee.
visited facilities,
True. Walking through a building is a visit, not an evaluation.
and prepared recommendations for the Board of Trustees.
This is exaggerated. The committee was asked one and only one question. Should the district hold three small bond elections, or one big one. Those of us (both "Citizens") who expressed preference for one, even smaller, bond were outvoted by "Faculty".
In their reports, the committee prioritized facility projects into three specific phases.
This is incorrect. The three phase framework and all projects and details comprising each phase had been determined and published before the first committee meeting. Several committee members asked questions regarding changes to the priorities previously established by the district and contract managers. However, no such changes were allowed.
It is correct that during the committee meetings, the overall scope of the projects changed. At the first committee meeting the total bond package was projected to be $211 million. At the second meeting we were told the package would also include an unspecified sum for vehicles and a new vehicle maintenance facility. Only at the third and final committee meeting were the vehicle details presented BY the District TO the Committee and the final total of $215 Million was established.
Please realize that in a three week period the district saw the scope of project costs creep upwards by $4 million dollars. Thank God the committee wasn't invited back for a fourth meeting.
This bond referendum will fund each recommended phase.
The taxpayers may become responsible to fund each phase. Phase one can be supported, at present, if the district raises tax rates to the legal maximum. If and only if property valuations increase, either by new development or the increase in assessed value of our existing property, then the district will gain what the Superintendent refers to as "cap room". Whenever in the future, on the proposed phased schedule or much later, the valuations rise, the district can borrow as much money as the "cap room" will support without returning to voters for approval of any amount or for any specific purpose.
The Board of Trustees and the Administration appreciate the work of these individuals and the time that they spent becoming knowledgeable about LISD facilities.
This committee member reciprocates with appreciation for the opportunity to see how such decisions are developed. If more citizens were provided the opportunity to experience district officials' steam-roller, voter turnout would be higher.
This document provides information related to the 2006 Bond Referendum Package.
True again, insofar as misinformation is a type of information
Please take time to review this information.
Please make efforts to get information from other sources besides the district itself.
District citizens who have additional questions about the bond referendum are encouraged to contact any Board member or school district administration.
Remember that by law neither board members nor district administrators may advocate any position regarding your vote. Violations of state law should be reported to the Texas State Ethics Commission at (800) 325-8506.
You will also find information on the district’s website at www.lancasterisd.org.
You will not find the minutes of the Citizens'/Facilty Bond Committee meetings. You will not find copies of the contract between Red Whiddon of "The School Business Group" and the district. You will not find minutes of the Board of Trustees' meeting of 28 August when this election was approved. You will not find the monthly progress reports by Gallagher Construction Company regarding the projects of the 2004 Bond. You won't find details of the planned "technology" purchases of some $20 million dollars. But check it out, anyway. Maybe you'll find the missing "honor roll".
We stand ready to answer your questions.
Sincerely,
Larry Lewis, Ph.D.
Superintendent of Schools
I think you should call and ask him
The original letter will be quoted fully and exactly in italics, and my comments will be inserted in bold text.
August 29, 2006
Dear Lancaster ISD,
The Lancaster Independent School District Board of Trustees voted to call a school bond referendum election on Tuesday November 7, 2006.
Syntax matters. The board voted on August 28th. The election will be held November 7th.
The $215,000,000 referendum will occur in three phases as student growth occurs.
The referendum is the election. The election will occur, as stated above, on November 7th. Perhaps the referendum will pass. Perhaps not. If and only if the referendum passes might one or more BORROWING phases occur.
The $215 Million to be borrowed is NOT contingent upon student growth. Whether the students are three feet tall or grow to be seven feet tall, the amount the referendum authorizes to be borrowed is the same.
What the district clumsily intends to imply is that as the average number of students in daily attendance grows, more money will be borrowed. This is not accurate. Only if the Lancaster tax base grows may phases two or three become legally possible. If the housing bubble collapses or if anticipated commercial development falls through, the borrowing authorized by this election can not occur. That is, even if student attendance numbers rise; if development and taxable values fall, the 2nd and 3rd phases will not take place. Similarly, even if student attendance falls, but taxable valuations rise, the district CAN borrow and spend money that may be authorized by this referendum.
The capital needs assessment for the November 2006 referendum began with a Citizens Bond/ Faculty Committee and included a review of facilities, expenditures and needs by citizens.
The Citizens'/Facility Bond Committee met three times for a total of about seven hours. One hour of that time was spent providing Superintendent Lewis an audience to discuss the May 2006 election. Another hour provided consultant Red Whiddon a similar audience while he assured all committee members the $110 Million borrowed in 2004 was accounted for -- though he also informed that committee he was neither an accountant nor auditor. Two hours were spent touring buildings. Another, providing an audience for staffers from the city Planning and Zoning commission discuss housing permit processes and statistics.
The citizens did not develop the needs assessment. Those documents were developed by non-citizens; including Red Whiddon, Von Gallagher, and Matt Boles.
The 50 residents involved in the process analyzed demographic information,
The committee was provided advertising from a demographic firm, Population And Survey Analysis, who had conducted a demographic survey for the district in 2003 and hoped to get another such contract. The data provided to the committee had not, in fact, been updated by PASE since their original survey. Demographic data from the TEA Region Ten was also provided. Whether or not individual committee members "analyzed" the data provided, there was no open discussion of the data as assembled by the district.
studied building evaluations,
There were no formal reports on any individual building provided to the committee or composed by the committee.
visited facilities,
True. Walking through a building is a visit, not an evaluation.
and prepared recommendations for the Board of Trustees.
This is exaggerated. The committee was asked one and only one question. Should the district hold three small bond elections, or one big one. Those of us (both "Citizens") who expressed preference for one, even smaller, bond were outvoted by "Faculty".
In their reports, the committee prioritized facility projects into three specific phases.
This is incorrect. The three phase framework and all projects and details comprising each phase had been determined and published before the first committee meeting. Several committee members asked questions regarding changes to the priorities previously established by the district and contract managers. However, no such changes were allowed.
It is correct that during the committee meetings, the overall scope of the projects changed. At the first committee meeting the total bond package was projected to be $211 million. At the second meeting we were told the package would also include an unspecified sum for vehicles and a new vehicle maintenance facility. Only at the third and final committee meeting were the vehicle details presented BY the District TO the Committee and the final total of $215 Million was established.
Please realize that in a three week period the district saw the scope of project costs creep upwards by $4 million dollars. Thank God the committee wasn't invited back for a fourth meeting.
This bond referendum will fund each recommended phase.
The taxpayers may become responsible to fund each phase. Phase one can be supported, at present, if the district raises tax rates to the legal maximum. If and only if property valuations increase, either by new development or the increase in assessed value of our existing property, then the district will gain what the Superintendent refers to as "cap room". Whenever in the future, on the proposed phased schedule or much later, the valuations rise, the district can borrow as much money as the "cap room" will support without returning to voters for approval of any amount or for any specific purpose.
The Board of Trustees and the Administration appreciate the work of these individuals and the time that they spent becoming knowledgeable about LISD facilities.
This committee member reciprocates with appreciation for the opportunity to see how such decisions are developed. If more citizens were provided the opportunity to experience district officials' steam-roller, voter turnout would be higher.
This document provides information related to the 2006 Bond Referendum Package.
True again, insofar as misinformation is a type of information
Please take time to review this information.
Please make efforts to get information from other sources besides the district itself.
District citizens who have additional questions about the bond referendum are encouraged to contact any Board member or school district administration.
Remember that by law neither board members nor district administrators may advocate any position regarding your vote. Violations of state law should be reported to the Texas State Ethics Commission at (800) 325-8506.
You will also find information on the district’s website at www.lancasterisd.org.
You will not find the minutes of the Citizens'/Facilty Bond Committee meetings. You will not find copies of the contract between Red Whiddon of "The School Business Group" and the district. You will not find minutes of the Board of Trustees' meeting of 28 August when this election was approved. You will not find the monthly progress reports by Gallagher Construction Company regarding the projects of the 2004 Bond. You won't find details of the planned "technology" purchases of some $20 million dollars. But check it out, anyway. Maybe you'll find the missing "honor roll".
We stand ready to answer your questions.
Sincerely,
Larry Lewis, Ph.D.
Superintendent of Schools
I think you should call and ask him
Sunday, September 24, 2006
Speaking of Advanced Placement courses:
The Washington Post recently cited a study on AP/IB course work that indicates many schools, included many in Texas, suffer a sort of "course title inflation". Any math at all is "Pre Calculus" or any Spanish work at any grade level is "College Spanish". Quoting the article:
" ... 60 percent of low-income students, 65 percent of African American students and 57 percent of Hispanic students who had received course credit for geometry or algebra 2 in Texas failed a state exam covering material from geometry and algebra 1. ... a math professor at California State University in Los Angeles, examined an AP calculus class in a Pasadena, Calif., high school. All 23 students ... got As and Bs from their teacher, but their grades on the AP exam were the college equivalent of 21 Fs and two Ds. "
It would be terribly interesting to compare the grades of our top students -- or even just Grade Point Average as evidenced by honor role placement -- with the names of those who take AP course work generating those grades and the names of those who actually pass the AP tests.
This would help the district match resources to needs. Maybe AP courses are what we need. Maybe not. Maybe we need more, small classrooms for AP work. Maybe not.
How can we tell if the district keeps the data secret?
The Washington Post recently cited a study on AP/IB course work that indicates many schools, included many in Texas, suffer a sort of "course title inflation". Any math at all is "Pre Calculus" or any Spanish work at any grade level is "College Spanish". Quoting the article:
" ... 60 percent of low-income students, 65 percent of African American students and 57 percent of Hispanic students who had received course credit for geometry or algebra 2 in Texas failed a state exam covering material from geometry and algebra 1. ... a math professor at California State University in Los Angeles, examined an AP calculus class in a Pasadena, Calif., high school. All 23 students ... got As and Bs from their teacher, but their grades on the AP exam were the college equivalent of 21 Fs and two Ds. "
It would be terribly interesting to compare the grades of our top students -- or even just Grade Point Average as evidenced by honor role placement -- with the names of those who take AP course work generating those grades and the names of those who actually pass the AP tests.
This would help the district match resources to needs. Maybe AP courses are what we need. Maybe not. Maybe we need more, small classrooms for AP work. Maybe not.
How can we tell if the district keeps the data secret?
Our local newspaper man, fighting the neverending battle for truth, justice, and the Lancaster Way, confirms an interesting tidbit over on his personal blog (scroll down to comments...)
The (Lancaster) ISD did, in the past, run honor rolls in our paper. They quit 2? years ago, said they were going to do something different. Haven't yet, at least not for public consumption. Per student capita, the honor roll was about half as long as most districts.
Something different might simply include a list of students attempting Advanced Placement (AP) Courses.
One of the claims made for the district's need of additional classrooms is that AP --and now, International Baccalaureate ( IB ) -- classes don't draw the 18-22 students-per-classroom that a more traditional or basic course does. So if, say, grade 10 comprises some 400 students. We might suppore ordinarily they'd need about 20 classrooms. But if half that number are in AP/IB classes with average class size of 10 then we'd need 10 classroom for the "ordinary students" and 20 classrooms for the AP/IB students. That's a total of 30 classrooms -- and a nominal grade ten seating for 400 now requires a "capacity" of 600 seats.
But if only 10% of that 400 students is in AP/IB then we'd have 380 ordinary students in 19 classrooms and 40 students in 4 classroom and the "seat cost" of AP/IB programs would be 3 classrooms or only 60 seats.
D-Magazine reported in April (vol 33, # 4) for school year 2005-06 Lancaster High had 1669 students of which 230 attempted the AP/IB programs and only 15 students passed the required exams. Assuming those figures are exact we would have needed 72 classrooms (1440) seats for the ordinary kids and 23 classrooms (460 seat CAPACITY, not enrollment) for the AP/IB kids for a total seating of 1900 seats.
Also, expanding the number of kids in AP/IB will, over the foreseeable future, merely "take up the slack" in the underused capacity of those classrooms. The 10-student classes held in 20 seat classrooms could double in usage before one extra classroom needed to be built.
The new high school is 2200 seats. Even the AP/IB courses do NOT, at present add up to support claims we are "bursting at the seams."
That is, the claims don't add up to anybody who actually does the math. Journalists in general are not very interested in math.
On the other hand, the Lancaster ISD not only does not report the honor roll, it hasn't reported how many kids are in AP/IB courses, either. (And they certainly aren't publicizing to local newspapers that D-Mag statistic --15 passing out of 230 testing. ) So, journalists might possibly be enticed away from writing haiku and criticizing distant federal polititions to, instead, attempting arithmetic on local issues, but they face serious challenges in finding the basic numbers to get started.
The (Lancaster) ISD did, in the past, run honor rolls in our paper. They quit 2? years ago, said they were going to do something different. Haven't yet, at least not for public consumption. Per student capita, the honor roll was about half as long as most districts.
Something different might simply include a list of students attempting Advanced Placement (AP) Courses.
One of the claims made for the district's need of additional classrooms is that AP --and now, International Baccalaureate ( IB ) -- classes don't draw the 18-22 students-per-classroom that a more traditional or basic course does. So if, say, grade 10 comprises some 400 students. We might suppore ordinarily they'd need about 20 classrooms. But if half that number are in AP/IB classes with average class size of 10 then we'd need 10 classroom for the "ordinary students" and 20 classrooms for the AP/IB students. That's a total of 30 classrooms -- and a nominal grade ten seating for 400 now requires a "capacity" of 600 seats.
But if only 10% of that 400 students is in AP/IB then we'd have 380 ordinary students in 19 classrooms and 40 students in 4 classroom and the "seat cost" of AP/IB programs would be 3 classrooms or only 60 seats.
D-Magazine reported in April (vol 33, # 4) for school year 2005-06 Lancaster High had 1669 students of which 230 attempted the AP/IB programs and only 15 students passed the required exams. Assuming those figures are exact we would have needed 72 classrooms (1440) seats for the ordinary kids and 23 classrooms (460 seat CAPACITY, not enrollment) for the AP/IB kids for a total seating of 1900 seats.
Also, expanding the number of kids in AP/IB will, over the foreseeable future, merely "take up the slack" in the underused capacity of those classrooms. The 10-student classes held in 20 seat classrooms could double in usage before one extra classroom needed to be built.
The new high school is 2200 seats. Even the AP/IB courses do NOT, at present add up to support claims we are "bursting at the seams."
That is, the claims don't add up to anybody who actually does the math. Journalists in general are not very interested in math.
On the other hand, the Lancaster ISD not only does not report the honor roll, it hasn't reported how many kids are in AP/IB courses, either. (And they certainly aren't publicizing to local newspapers that D-Mag statistic --15 passing out of 230 testing. ) So, journalists might possibly be enticed away from writing haiku and criticizing distant federal polititions to, instead, attempting arithmetic on local issues, but they face serious challenges in finding the basic numbers to get started.