Here is the strongest argument of all on why a 9.5 mil continuous levy would be devasting on our community.

It was an article in the Recourd Courier called "High jobless rate the new normal? Employment market may be weak for years".

I suggest everyone read it.

It is outlining our future.

I don't think I could have said it any better.

Those of you in a cushy job but start to sit up strait. Your company may be next!

Martin Fleming

There is a lecture delivered by Jeb Bush on our education system in this post. Although you should read this whole page (I know most think I post long opinions, but I have nothing on these guys), in order to comprehend what is being said.

http://www.varpartners.net/%3fpage_id=101

They are confirmining what I have been saying all along. The true question is why hasn't our district been working towards this?

Is what our district doing truly for the children or is it for the financial success of those teaching our children?

You decide.

Martin Fleming

The district has been pushing for a new high school and have been preaching this to our students.

I too believe the students do not have any clue as to what this would cost in our community. The currilculum here doesn't address that. They should.

I am looking at things from many different angles and that is why I come to the conclusions that I do.

These are my opinions and suggestions they are not set in stone but they help us with educating our children to a higher level.

Check EcotOhio.org. This is a on-line charter school that uses not textbooks what-so-ever. It appears they are having some successful results. Look at the videos they have for their graduation.

The concept they deliver is good but it lacks the social experience I believe all chidren need. I also like the students to take P.E. to further enhance their social experience.

There may still be a few textbooks in the mix but it will reduce the strains children experience now from having to carry such heavy items. Studies show children are experiencing more pain in their backs compared to students of yesteryear.

Computers were supposed to reduce the amount of paper used but as everyone knows, we use quite a bit more paper today than we did years ago. I know I do.

I am elated however to know that my grand daughter is using a Flash Drive (Thumb Drive as known by some), for some of her work. This is a start (she is in the 7th grade), and she is excited about using one. Thus, it has eliminated the need for some paper.

It would also be a boon if the teachers are allowing the students to upload to their directory on the schools server so that teachers can grade them from there. This I believe would make it easier for the teachers especially if they can access that directory from their home.

It would be even better if the students could directly upload to their directory from home and this way, we would never hear about the dog eating homework, forgetting the homework or losing the homework.

Imagine teachers not having to keep track of all that paper!

Technology is only a tool and should always be thought of as such. Students need interaction with a live teacher in the classroom, we cannot eliminate teachers such as the way they do on-line schools. Teachers are an integral part of learning and they are a valuable resource for children.

I went to the school to debate why we did not need a new high school and enlightened the students on what the cost would be and how long it would take for anyone to benefit from building a new school. I knew the students were not going to look at the costs.

Computer use in grades K-8 would be more controlled than what it would be in a high school setting. It has to be. In the high school setting we would allow the students to have more flexibility in their computer use. The lower grades would be more for getting students to use a computer and become familiar with them. We wouldn't have to wait until a student makes it to high school to begin training and enhancing their familiarity with them.

With computers available to every student all day long, we can increase class sizes, reduce the amount of staff, raise the pay for the teachers and relieve quite a bit of stress for both teachers and students.

If we used the same software that Ecotohio.org uses and bring that into the classromm, then we would have good control over how the computers are used and provide safety for the students.

I have set up a few computers from on-line learning and found the software keeps the students from doing just anything they want on the computer. They use a proxy server that regulates how the computer is used when accessing the internet and keeps the student from abusing or misusing the system.

Fusing that concept and integrating it into our current curriculum would bring cost savings we really need to keep the teachers we need.

Out west they have increased class sizes to 50 students because of the ecomony. I don't want to see that happen here. I would not want to see any class over thirty students unless it was P.E.

I also don't want to see teachers laid off in our district for we may lose some exceptional teachers.

Teachers are a high cost to the district and they do work hard at what they do. But there is a breaking point to where the community or district will not be able to afford so many teachers due to lack of unlimited funds.

We have to take a hard look at this and find a way to offset the costs but still provide a high quality education to our children.

Up until this poin, no one has come up with a way to do this. I am only offering suggestions and opinions. It is a start.

We need more involvment in our schools education process and I am only starting the ball rolling.

We need more ideas from more people, we need more taxpayers to attend School Board meetings, we need the district to be more responsive to ideas. Currently our district feels that more teachers we have, the smaller the class size and the greater the curriculum will solve our problem of educating children.

This doesn't appear to be working with really great success and the gains we are making are not as great as they need to be for our nation to be successful and strong.

We have to face the reality of this and stop living in a fantasy world.

Martin Fleming

"From that debate I spent in the classroom last year with a student on a new high school, their main concern was what was in it for them and not how much of a burden it may have put on their community or how much it would cost for some of the dreams they wanted included in the new high school. So it appears at this point that they are not coming away with critical thinking skills to be effective, productive, and rational members of a society who are able to handle complex issues in an intelligent manner.

Granted this was only a tenth grade class but they were only concerned with what was on their side of the fence. Sort of like the way you are seeing things."

I think your expectations are too high. Do you really expect a 15 year old to think about the costs associated with building a new high school and how that will effect the community? I would be willing to bet that the only kids that would even come close to saying such a thing are the ones who have parents that grumble and complain every time a new levy is proposed.

I think technology is a great tool for the classroom. However, it is unrealistic to think it can be a replacement for textbooks and paper. I also think you only look at the effects of an infusion of technology into curriculum in a high school setting. Last I checked, most school systems have a few grades prior to 9-12.

Again, computers can be used to grade. Maybe not in literature or compositions but it can be used to grade many other courses.

I think maybe you should check out sites like www.ecotohio.org and other charter schools available for at home learning.

I don't believe you have read everything I have ever posted on the Record Pubs opinion web site.

Further, note the word Opinion. Think about that one for a while.

You basically are reiterating everything I have ever posted.

We need students to come away with critical thinking skilss however your "Theory" rational is not working that is why it is still considered a
"Theory".

Computers are tools and should be used as such. They should not replace teachers in any way shape or form and that is why I look at charter schools such as EcotOhio with tongue in cheek.

It is about becoming educated and enlightened and being able to comprehend ideas that are foreign to the student.

I don't see this know. Meeting with students last year in a debate class showed the students were intelligent but the one students presentation showed they didn't think through with what they were debating about. They did not look at the situation from all angles and analyze it.

Computers can help students understand different points of views whether you want to admint that or not. It delivers different points of views when you read anything delivered to you over the internet.

I do understand teaching quite a bit more than you think I do and it appears you have been wrapped up in your little world and not have really taken notice of what is happening outside of your school walls. That is quite unfortunate.

From that debate I spent in the classroom last year with a student on a new high school, their main concern was what was in it for them and not how much of a burden it may have put on their community or how much it would cost for some of the dreams they wanted included in the new high school. So it appears at this point that they are not coming away with critical thinking skills to be effective, productive, and rational members of a society who are able to handle complex issues in an intelligent manner.

Granted this was only a tenth grade class but they were only concerned with what was on their side of the fence. Sort of like the way you are seeing things.

Martin Fleming

Ok, this is why I don't think you understand teaching. A computer cannot grade a paper. A computer cannot evaluate assumptions students are making in argument, bias views they may be presenting either consciously or subconsciously, or help a student understand how rhetorical forces play out through our experiences - which come to light through their writing. A computer cannot help a student understand different points of view or how words carry power and effect on the reader. Grading papers isn't just about grammar and punctuation. It is about the ideas we are presenting and how we are presenting them. It is about power, authority, and language.

If you are interested in technology in the classroom, you may want to consider how multi-modal discourse has become more prevalent, and courses are being taught using Second Life and other online/digital spheres.

I am the coordinator for online and digital education programs at my institution, and I can tell you that collaborative learning theory (and Ed theory in general) is still very relevant. Technology is a tool, but like any tool, it is the way we use it that is important.

I think to you have to consider what we want to accomplish when we teach. Is it just to help people get a good job when they get out of school? (Which is what it seems you're ideas would support). Or, is it about becoming "educated" and "enlightened" so that we can learn to live and understand different cultures, critically analyze what the media feeds us, and become active and successful members of a democracy? Don't we want students to come away with critical thinking skills to be effective, productive, and rational members of a society who are able to handle complex issues in an intelligent manner?

Additionally, all teachers want to get rid of testing. I'm not sure why you don't understand that. It is voters, politicians, and administrators who force teachers to teach to the tests. Why? Well, because tests show a definitive number. Something politicians and administrators can point to as "success" and something that voters understand. Teachers understand this isn't a positive move, but they have little power to change that.

Finally, I feel this has to be my last comment to this. I really feel as if you are unwilling to try and see anything beyond your own notions. You have done little research, demonstrated a very remedial understanding of educational practices (both administrative and teacher-based), and frankly it is just frustrating trying to have a discussion about this with you. You offer no insight just some assumptions. If you really want to understand teaching, go take some courses on educational theory at your local college - or in how to teach a specific discipline like composition, mathematics, communications, etc. Or, go to the University library and grab some books by Dewey, Friere, etc. and learn a little about what the practice of teacher is/or should be encompassing.

Sorry, but I do not train. I teach.

Training is what you do when you teach by the answers on the test. That is what our education system currently tends to do. Being an educator one would think you got that drift.

I prefer to educate people to comprehend what they are doing so that they have the ability to make changes or look at things different ways.

If we could bring our students into a true digital age, then you would not be grading papers. The technology would be doing it for us so that we not only grade the student but the teacher that is to be teaching and not training students how to take a test and memorize answers.

It is nice that you have published in scholary journals, however, only your peers read it and it is our current method of teaching that is passe' and needs to be changed.

We need to stop considering collaborative theories and start working on getting technology in the education system in every students hands.

We have spent too much time on research and theory which has proven time and time again to be out of date for todays digital world when it still contains thoughts and ideas that were the norm 50 years ago.

Martin Fleming

If you want to compare credentials, we can do that. I've been in education for over 10 years, and a scholar for about the same, having been published in scholarly, peer-reviewed national journals.

Your idea of evaluating how a student takes a test is only going to provide a surface level response, until you look to the larger political and rhetorical forces involved. That is, what is it we are trying to teach? How do different ways of teaching affect overall education and the development of critical thought? How is power, access, and success measured and at odds with those rhetorical forces.

If we consider John Dewey and Paulo Freire, then we must look well past testing as an answer to assessment and "training" as a way of education.

I think we also need to consider the collaborative learning theories proposed by Ken Bruffee and others. We need collaborative learning to understand different viewpoints. Truth is about perception. Therefore, learning a trade by oneself might be doable, but educating oneself becomes problematic.

Additionally, I think you are confusing "training" with "education," something that, unfortunately, is a trend in this country. But I digress... anyway, back to grading papers.

on the contrary, I have been delving into how we teach for many years now. I have had first person involvement in teaching both adults and children.


The basic testing that we should look at is how many questions did the student answer before just selecting any old answer. If we know this, then we can adjust our teaching to work towards a higher goal. But the answer to this must be a complete and honest answer.

Telling the students to finish all the questions whether they know the answer or not does nothing more than give us a false answer to whether the children know the subject or not.

True we don't know as much as the lawyer, doctor or plumber but it doesn't mean that we can't learn or begin to understand.

An apprenticeship usually, now usually goes two to three years. There is no reason why someone can not learn on their own over a longer period how to understand and maybe even do those things.

People do reasearch, continuing education, self study and can learn on their own. Just because you can't do it now doesn't mean you can't learn.

Learning is something you are going to do for the rest of your life whether you admit it or not. Everyone can learn more than what they know now.

I have taught myself many different trades that also included instruction by professionals in the field who have the certifications or degrees for that profession. In my life I have learned to ask questions and instruction.

We need to know what questions the students did answer correctly, not the ones they guessed at. Only in this way can you make a determination to what our children are learning.

We need to know how many of the questions they did answer without guessing. If they get lucky and answer many of the questions (through per luck), correctly, they may get placed in a class that they will not be able to achieve or perform well.

This will hurt the student in many ways and we should be careful never to place students in this position.

There are books out there written by true scholars who believe the way we teach now is detrimental to our desires of high achievement.

I do not know the true answer to how we should teach our children. I only offer suggestions and recommendations that may be the answer. Just maybe, if we put some of those in place, we may see a change. Many factors will need to be addressed and we should not be held back by any factors that do not agree with the change.

It will be a tough road but unless we start to change soon, our nation just not the schools will be in great jeopardy.

It may be hard for us to swallow, but funding being reduced by propety values falling, foreclosures on homes, loss of jobs and loss of businesses will be far more difficult to overcome.

A levy to support the school district at this time is poor timing and will only add fuel to the recession we are currenlty experiencing.

We must take another route at this time rather than a levy. Our economy and community can not sustain such a hardship.

Martin Fleming

I think the problem is that you have very little knowledge of education theory or the work being done by teachers and academics to improve the way we teach students.

Too many parents, citizens, and administrators have undeserved senses of "knowing" how to fix education in this country. We recognize that we don't understand medicine as well as our doctor, that we don't understand plumbing as well as our plumber, but for some reason everyone thinks they know how to teach - how to educate effectively.

The standardized testing that schools, citizens, and politicians place so much emphasis on is an increasingly obvious culprit for drops in educational outcomes. Standardized tests record what a student can regurgitate, not what they have learned or how they have developed critical thinking skills.

Because so much is tied to the "score" a school receives (i.e. money, prestige, etc.), teachers are being forced to "teach to the test" even when they know that isn't an effective way to educate young people.

Do some research before you offer your opinions and perhaps you'll receive less visceral responses.