GilfordGrok

The Gilford Superintendant of schools launched a brief investigation to learn why seven high school students left the district for an alternate private education.  I applaud the Superintendant for making every effort to keep Gilford schools a competitive choice for all Gilford students.  I would kindly suggest he look into the ongoing campaign to adopt the controversial IB curriculum as a major source of parental concern. The International Baccalaureate (IB) program seeks to teach our students to become “global citizens” and prepares them to “compete in the global economy”, whatever any of that means. I work “global” and I can assure you this program will do little to prepare K thru 12 students for global work. School Board member, Kurt Webber, stated that the military has adopted the concept of global awareness training in dealing with other countries. There are colleges that also have specialized curriculum for those wishing to work globally. In my opinion, these secondary schools are where “global” skills should be taught. Can’t we concentrate on giving our children the tools to prepare them for college or working a job here in this country?  I’ve visited hundreds of businesses in many corners of the world and not once did any of them complain about the lack of a “globally trained” workforce. Universally, they all complain about the same thing. Young workers today can’t perform basic math problems, deal with units of measure or understand the concept of simply showing up on schedule.

The Superintendant and Gilford School Board could better serve the community by maintaining the good AP curriculum that has produced good results. They should also continue promoting the basic skills students need to get them to the next level as opposed to simply skipping to the next level. Skipping the important step of learning the basics will not help them function in the global world, if they even choose to move their career in that direction. Speaking of careers, I have logged several hours reading the IB propaganda and I have yet to read anything about working toward a career. The concept of actually working for a living seems to be completely lost on the strategic plan of the IB school system.

Unfortunately, the district leaders are completely tone deaf once they have made up their minds. They seem to endlessly delude themselves in the “rose colored glasses” concept of pushing their newest agenda. They have mastered the art of absorbing only the good information and deflecting any negative information. Ignoring more workable and practical solutions in creating adequate athletic field space is one thing but messing up the education of a generation of children is quite another.  I encourage both parents and town leaders to read as much information as they can about the IB program and not just the propaganda on the IB web site. There is plenty of stuff on the internet to get “both” sides of the issue.    

Posted by Terry S. at 04:00 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

To those that claim the newest fad to hit NH in education, the International Baccalaureate Programme, is all about education, I say look at the facts. This posting, by a writer who is in FAVOR of IB, glowingly reports of its main raison d'etre:

The IB combines high academic standards with a powerful humanist purpose. Its mission statement speaks of developing “inquiring, knowledgeable and caring young people who help to create a better and more peaceful world through intercultural understanding and respect.”

"But Doug--It'll also help our kids be more competititve when it comes to getting into college. Sure, maybe they teach peace and all that, but surely it's a small piece of the overall programme." Maybe you think so, but that's not how the cheerleader/blogger views it:

Because the IB’s mission is centered on changing the world, it is constantly learning and changing itself.

See? And you thought your kids were going to school to learn readin', writin', and 'rithmetic...

Posted by Doug at 11:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

When I scanned the chart that was printed in the Citizen today ("Lakes Region follows trend in NECAP test scores") in the dead tree version (the chart is not online at this time), I was not happy at all.  The first thing that went through my mind was "we pay how much for this kind of a result?"  Guess what happens in the private sector.....especially if this had been going on for years and years.

To be honest, I don't know if the Citizen asked the Gilford SAU their comments.  Frankly, if I was on the Gilford School Board or SAU Staff, I'd be ducking too.  This is just plain embarrassing for  parents that expect better.

Number of students tested:    143

Level 1 - Substantially  Below Proficient     Level 2 - Partially Proficient
Level 3 -  Proficient                                Level 4 - Proficient with distinction 

Got that?  40% of our 11th Graders - 35- are less than proficient in Reading????

Well, there's always Math, right?

Oy vay! Only THREE QUARTERS of our kids can't do math at the level at which they should be doing.  Got that?  110 kids aren't at the level that they are supposed to be at!!!

Well,  at least they can write, right?

Oops..not quite.  For the record - 84% is 120 students

40%, 77%, and 84%

Bad to worse to horrible....Sigh....

BTW, the numbers are from the Citizen - I take no credit or blame for the Reading and Writing cumulatives totaling other than 100% (other than the usual "fat-fingeritis" we all suffer from at times).

I'll be reviewing this against the other results I've posted before....and cross checking against the NH DOE site later.

I am almost all but sure that the following will be absolutely raise a few hackles, but since this is an opinion blog, I'll oblige.  Given the numbers, somebody's gotta step up and speak out.  What's that's obnoxious Liberal phrase - "speaking truth to power"? 

• I'm just dying to hear what the explanations are going to be for the Reading fiasco.  After all 87 or 120 are not just the "challenged" few.

• When is "more time" enough, and when is "more resources" enough?"
  

When is it time for results?  Is it time for "taxpayers pay for performance"?

If it were just a few, one could say "students".  A few more, "uninvolved parents" or "unable to enforce discipline".  Time to add another......

Posted by Skip at 09:23 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)

UPDATE:        Here's their new website - www.gilfordrobotics.com

Also, three audio interviews that I did the night that I did when I took the below pictures

    Mike Andrews - Mentor

    Lucas Doyle - Programming

    Gordon Scott - Team Captain 

_______________________________________________________________ 

Got the chance to visit with the FIRST Robotics team again just before it was time to box up the completed robot for shipping to Manchester.  They'll get to get the kinks out this coming Friday and the competition will be on Saturday - we're hoping for a live update from the arena next week!

In the mean time, here's some pictures!

 Joysticks - left, right, sideways, arm up/down, and in/out

Checking the arm

Continue reading "Whose on FIRST - it is ready to roll!" »

Posted by Skip at 09:03 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Just getting back from another biz trip - and the Citizen had this story about the Gilford High F.I.R.S.T. Robotics team.  If you haven't heard, this is the school competitive program that pits different school groups in building robots that will try to fulfill a mission.  This year, it is competing with two other groups as part of your team in racing around a closed loop circuit (think traditional race car), getting a ball from an on-high retainer, shephard it around the course, and put it back if you can.

This is the kind of stuff that makes me wish I was back in high school!!!

The parts are coming together. The Gilford FIRST Robotics team is making some headway on its latest robot, having already constructed the chassis that make their invention mobile.

"Good, bad and ugly," said Team Advisor Chris Drever, describing the progress of the group thus far.

Amy Drever explained that some setbacks have come because of the weather. When snow falls and school is canceled, so are the group's work sessions, which are held almost every night of the week.

This year's task requires that teams maneuver a 7.3 pound ball around a track. The restriction is that any robot cannot be more than five feet tall in its starting position.

To aid in their mission, the students have designed an extendible arm that will be able to direct the ball whichever way they choose. They also built their bot with Mecanum wheels that will allow the robot to move in any direction, which is expected to be handy in the competition.

"The design came through just the way I envisioned it," said Team Captain Lucas Doyle.

Doyle used a high-tech computer program called Solid Works to bring the pencil renderings of the robot to life.

"I spent three days just learning how to use the program," said Doyle.

Read more - this is an excellent program in that it takes some of what the kids learn in the classroom and applies it directly to a project!

Continue reading "Gilford's F.I.R.S.T Robot Team - Progress!" »

Posted by Skip at 02:06 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)

Posted by Doug at 09:08 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Accountability?

During Laconia's last election when the Tax Cap was the major issue, David Stamps wrote an impassioned plea against it, stating that the taxpayers had to trust their government. My Letter pointed out that the mere fact that the petition was on the ballot, with significantly more signatories than needed, already proved that the trust of which he wrote had all ready been broken.

In the same vein, Holly Ramer's article (AP) caught my eye as it reported on Senator Clinton's speech to the NEA meeting in Concord (certain unions cannot be ignored during elections and politicking was exactly what Clinton was doing with one of the biggest Democratic voting blocks in the country):

The 2002 No Child Left Behind Act requires school districts to provide free tutoring in math and reading to poor children in schools that repeatedly fail to meet state testing standards. Clinton said that amounts to $500 million a year being paid to tutoring companies and other supplemental service providers that aren't held accountable.

"Why would we outsource helping our kids to unaccountable private sector providers?" she said. "They don't have to follow our civil rights laws, their employees don't even have to be qualified, they aren't required to coordinate with educators, there's a grand total of zero evidence that they're doing any good."

Observations: Doesn't the law require all obey civil rights laws? NCLB was also the creation of uber-liberal Senator Kennedy – why isn't she bashing him as well as President Bush? And if schools are failing, why should students be penalized by removing help? After all, “it's all about the children”, right?

An inconvenient question: If there was no need for NCLB, and given the tremendous opposition by the NEA to it, why do you think it finally passed?

Consider - decades ago, the UAW was a powerful union with millions of members and could shut down the auto industry if targeted companies didn't bow to its demands. Combining restrictive work rules built up over time, high wage and benefit costs, and helping to churn out shoddy products sold to the public, the UAW has played a part in its own demise with a remaining membership of only about 600,000 and seemingly locked out of the “transplant factories” (e.g., Toyota). Who held the UAW (and car companies) accountable? Consumers – they stopped buying inferior high priced products as competitors provided better value. Effectively, the UAW did their part to kill their golden goose by not adjusting to competition.

The teachers unions virtually control K-12 education with spending about $500 billion / year. However, is the NEA starting to follow the footsteps of the UAW? While everyone may like their kids' teachers, make no mistake – in the aggregate, unions play hardball and brook no opposition – it is about money, power, and shutting down competition. Yet, with one of our most important national products our country produces at stake, well educated citizens, why is the phrase “the dumbing down of America” gaining traction?

The same lack of tutor accountability against Clinton decries seems to be the same perception by the public - a lack of accountability and results from the public school systems. One sees increased efforts for charter schools, increasing numbers of home schoolers, and enhanced efforts to aid parents with vouchers as parents are seemingly abandoning what they feel is an inferior product. The NEA fights against any effort to allow children to receive better publicly funded educations not under their control. Yet, without accountability, fair judgments cannot be made and fair actions cannot be taken.

The NEA, with steadfast opposition to NCLB and standardized testing seems to be trying to avoid the accountability of which Clinton is accusing the tutors. The problem is not educational spending as they want; look at the DC school system with its highest spending per student in the country – and ranks among the worst.

One level of accountability is by standardized measurements. The New England Common Assessment Program includes tests given at designated grade levels and provide snapshots of how NE students are doing. While other factors should be considered, these standardized tests provide parents and officials a way to judge a school's performance.

Our cost per pupil is well above the state average ($11,796 compared to $9,098). However, Gilford's recent results show performance below state average (rounding doesn't sum to 100%, actual categories were Advanced, Proficient, Basic, and Novice).

For the years listed, the majority of our 10th graders were judged not proficient. Who is accountable for these results?

Parents? More involvement with homework and demanding higher standards. Teachers? Set higher standards but also be given the ability to discipline unruly students. Management? Back teachers but also get rid of bad ones faster and setting teacher standards higher. Better performers should be paid more. The NEA is against merit pay – that would be “pitting teacher against teacher”.

Just like the private sector.....welcome to globalization.

Posted by Skip at 12:24 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

Q: How do you know a Gilford [politician] [bureaucrat] [special-interest water carrier] is being untruthful?

A: When they tell us that their [insert scheme du-jour here] "won't EVER cost the taxpayers a dime."

...Thomlinson, the chairman of the School Board, stressed that the funding for football amounted to 0.08 percent of the high school budget. He said that the board considered drafting a warrant article, but reached a "concensus decision" that because the sum was relatively small and offset by other revenues as a warrant article could be confusing to voters.

Tomlinson said the reason the School Board chose to include the program in its budget is because members felt a warrant article might be confusing for taxpayers who already must vote on a number of warrant articles, explaining that they might inadvertently vote against the measure.

And now, ladies and gentlemen, comes the next FREE GIFT: A BRAND NEW LIBRARY!

Posted by Doug at 09:44 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

 Update 1 - This Post was actually written on 11/17...after the first BudComm meeting at the High School.  This past Tuesday, 11/21, all of the artwork that had been displayed while the Play was being presented had been removed.  I do wonder how many people saw the piece...and felt the way I did - this was not appropriate.

This past Tuesday, the Budget Committee had its meeting at the High School (as opposed to normally holding them at the Town Hall).  As usual, not everyone goes home right away; small discussions about almost anything often spring up.  Given that it was the High School this time, I started to look at the artwork up on the wall around the lobby - often, this is done. 

To say that this caught my eye is an understatement.  I found it disturbing to say the least and I have waffled yes-I-should / no-I-shouldn't since Tuesday night.

Yeah I know - big bad conservative trying to censor the free expression of our students.  I'm trying to ridicule budding artists that are only trying to express their innermost feelings.  I'm supposed to be FOR the First Amendment, right?

Two things keep coming to mind - the first is the brouhaha that happened when the Fallen Alumni Memorial was first brought out in the papers.  I Posted my thoughts here, and here is the main thrust of it:

In a email to School Board members, Chairman Derek Tomlinson voiced concerns over a suggested graphic that depicts, amongst other military uniform items, a military weapon.

Tomlinson stated to School Board members heading up the memorial Margo Weeks and Kurt Webber, "I think you should seriously look at alternatives before we take this to the students."

Again, realize that what he is talking about is an almost uniformly symbol of honor and respect for a fallen comrade - an upside down rifle with its bayonet stuck into the ground, a helmet placed on top, and a pair of empty boots.

Now, PLEASE do not read me wrong - I think that the actual graphics on the Fallen Alumni Memorial are fitting.  The elements etched on the stone do a fine job of representing the those that have given their all for their country.

Now, contrast that with this (I have deliberately put it after the jump - if you are already having a bad day, you may wish to skip it).  And ask yourself this:

Which is worse - the rifle or this?  Which one would be more appropriate to really be seen in a high school with young, impressionable students in it?

Continue reading "Disturbing Artwork" »

Posted by Skip at 08:01 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Up on your Nabokov by Alec O'Meara- Editor, The Gilford Steamer

Doug Lambert is right. Well, check that. He’s almost right; we’ll give him that. Lambert, a member of the Gilford Budget Committee and longtime local columnist, recently wrote about the sentencing of former middle school teacher Matt McGonagle. In his column, he raises some interesting questions. He also raises some we disagree completely with, namely insinuating that a cover-up occurred so that the school could continue raising taxes and avoid bad press. We don’t think that’s the case here.

.

Obviously, if there had been a cover-up, that is very serious business. In this particular case, were there both teachers and students at the time who knew something was up, but never went to authorities? It is a fair question, but since the entire administration of the middle school, high school, and SAU office has turned over since the incident, the question lacks the explosive implications it would have had otherwise.

.

However, here’s a much more interesting question that is still in the ballpark of Lambert’s comments: how much of a role does gender play in how we all react to these cases?  More specifically, would that courtroom have been as full of friends and family supporting McGonagle if this had been about a 14-year-old boy instead of a girl? Would there have been as many “blind eyes” back in 2000? Does he get two years? What if he was black, or Hispanic? What happens then?

Continue reading "Teacher Sex Assault Discussion Continues..." »

Posted by Doug at 09:07 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)