| K-8 School; Why Not? | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Nov 10 2006, 08:33 PM (1,594 Views) | |
| fyi | Nov 11 2006, 01:51 PM Post #46 |
|
Principal
|
I don't understand this either. Why would Webster students be provided transportation, but not a k-8 school? In either case, the decision to send your child to a particular school would be up to the parent. As I said before, I would provide my own transportation and I'm sure a lot of others parents interested in k-8 would as well. |
![]() |
|
| Pete | Nov 11 2006, 01:52 PM Post #47 |
|
Principal
|
I like K-8 best but depending mostly on the number of schools there would be. K-8, one way to look at number of schools needed: Pre-LI we had a total of 23 schools comprising 20 Elem and 3 Middle Schools. Under K-8, we would rid 3 Middle Schools absorbed into 20 Elem leaving us with 20 K-8 schools. Though ridding 3 Middle schools no-doubt 20 k-8 schools would be way too expensive. Clearly there would be a lot more teachers w/ 20 K-8 schools than 20 K-6 & 3 Middle Schools. So in order to balance payroll costs, I wonder how many k-8 schools would equal the same number of teachers as 20 K-6 schools & 3 Middle Schools. Can someone advise? Here are some questions that come to mind: Are all the schools large enough? Are some too small that would warrent having open? Wouldn't there be money saved in busing? How much construction cost would be required reconfiguring schools to k-8? |
![]() |
|
| fyi | Nov 11 2006, 01:56 PM Post #48 |
|
Principal
|
"Something needs to be done" to prevent further enrollment losses. |
![]() |
|
| amomof2 | Nov 11 2006, 03:08 PM Post #49 |
|
Principal
|
Not only would it be nice to open Dickenson as a K-8 pilot, but it would be much nicer if there was one in each triad. I am sure there would be more than enough enrolled. |
![]() |
|
| Administrator | Nov 11 2006, 04:39 PM Post #50 |
|
Administrator
|
That would be best. But you have to start some where, and that is the only building I can think of to do it. |
![]() |
|
| ForMySons | Nov 11 2006, 04:46 PM Post #51 |
|
Principal
|
I agree! While there may be arguments, I know that my oldest son would do anything to protect his younger brothers. I think having younger kids in the family/school helps keep the oldest one from growing up so fast. |
![]() |
|
| ILIkeLI | Nov 11 2006, 05:58 PM Post #52 |
|
Principal
|
Even if there were only one k-8 school of choice for the district, imagine the sense of community that would develop over such an extended period of time in one building. Particularly for those enrolling in k/1st grade. IMO, that is awesome and a huge benefit to such a model. Not to mention all of the research that supports it's positive impact on achievement. |
![]() |
|
| Delynn | Nov 11 2006, 06:05 PM Post #53 |
|
Principal
|
I think reading this thread proves that there is no concensus on what is best for LPS as far as grade configuration. Some people view the older children (age 13) as "mentors" -- I have seen how they behave in my neighborhood -- they would scare the you-know-what out of my timid 5 year old -- trust me. Maybe the push should remain K-6 because that is what worked before in this district. Then again, why even discuss because it will be a cold day in hell before the BOE changes anything back to the way it was. This is probably a waste of time. PS: Could the lawsuit be brought back up because now they can prove "damages"?? (IE: loss of students) ******************************************************************** Let's get back to this point....This is a great question for someone associated with the CFLF...I know I would donate to this cause...if it was at all possible. Is it? I would love to do some smug, self rightous housecleaning... At the very least we need to band together and demand a certain resignation. And as far as the "so called" push for transparency and increased communication"...I have at least a dozen unanswered emails, calls and letters out there. My latest question was just last week, and maybe someone HERE has the infomation I am looking for...does anyone know exactly where the greatest percentage of student loss took place? The Dr. wants to pass it off as not enough incoming kindergarten students to replace the graduating seniors, but I have a feeling the actual numbers support a different story. |
![]() |
|
| Administrator | Nov 11 2006, 06:37 PM Post #54 |
|
Administrator
|
The only trend that I have noticed is that the opposition to K-5 has decreased dramatically. |
![]() |
|
| NFarquharson | Nov 11 2006, 06:51 PM Post #55 |
|
Principal
|
I agree. Prior to the LI rollout, I was against putting 6th grade into middle school, although I would never have been so involved in fighting it as I as the LI, since it is the most common configuration and we could still have more K-5 neighborhood schools. Now that they have dragged the 5th graders into a middle school environment and added a transition, a K-5, 6-8 configuration would be a significant improvement. They would probably have to re-open all 4 middle schools and probably add a 5th, preferably in the southwest part of the district in order to make it workable. Johnson would make sense. |
![]() |
|
| Aunt Bea | Nov 11 2006, 07:05 PM Post #56 |
|
Principal
|
This discussion makes me think we are back in early 2006, with all kinds of what-ifs being contemplated. The fact is, the district projected and planned for a student loss and adjusted this year's budget already for a reduction of 160 (or up to 250) of those 500 so throwing around the 4.4 million loss is misleading. And, the district got very lucky with the DTE windfall and will be able to absorb the additional student loss because of the LI (yep, I won't even argue this) without setting the district back or having to face any mid-year program cuts. But, I think it would be far too reactionary to do any adjusting to the LI based on what the district has seen in just 10 weeks. My guess is that it will take a few years of seeing how things go, and how the dust settles before any plans are adjusted. People may not like that, and may want to see some grand-scale revamping, but do you really see the doors of closed elementaries opening again next October? People left this year and if opposers say more will leave next year, I'll believe you. Livonia may well be a district of 16,500 in future years and our budget will have to be adjusted around that reality. I believe my kids will still get a quality education here, even if there are 1000 less kids in the district. |
![]() |
|
| NFarquharson | Nov 11 2006, 07:11 PM Post #57 |
|
Principal
|
Whether there will be adjustments or changes to the LI is ultimately dependant on who is at the board table. I think these are really great discussions. |
![]() |
|
| GrantGrid3 | Nov 11 2006, 08:10 PM Post #58 |
|
Principal
|
My six year old is also very timid, but still is doing well in the K-8 setting. It is not like they have constant interaction with the older grades. It is handled in a structured and positive setting. I am a firm believer that a 10-13 year old mentoring (or helping if that sounds better) a 6-7 year old with math, reading or any activity, gains/learns just as much as the younger child. One is receiving help from someone they like and look up to, and the older child gains a sense of community, accomplishment and good will. |
![]() |
|
| Administrator | Nov 11 2006, 08:11 PM Post #59 |
|
Administrator
|
It is just so disheartening to me that the powers that be found it acceptable to drive out 1000, and diminish the education for a 4 year group of students. You are correct Bea, it will take 3 or 4 years to see any improvement in student achievement. The problem is that represents around 4000 kids that are taking the brunt of this. If we truly are representing all students, you would faze all the changes in over an extended period of time with a comprehensive plan. And most educational research tells me that this plan likely will not work in an urban area. There are so many dynamics that were just not considered when this plan was implemented. Livonia is so, so different than any other district using it. Saline? Novi? The demographics and district size are worlds apart. |
![]() |
|
| ILIkeLI | Nov 11 2006, 08:26 PM Post #60 |
|
Principal
|
What about planning to slow the loss? What about planning to attract students? It seems that the prevalent feeling toward student loss in the admin. and their supporters is "people come and go". It is almost as if their is no care or concern about the loss and continuing loss. I think that it is reckless and irresponsible for an administration to operate under such a carefree assumption. So the idea is to sit back and watch the distrcit shrink? It is going to effect the quality of education at some point. The BOE needs to have 2 new trustees in May that will have some positve ideas to draw and retain students rather than sittting back and accepting continual loss. |
![]() |
|
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Livonia Neighbors Archive · Next Topic » |






9:09 AM Jul 11