Happy New Year! As we dig out more of the white stuff, which has now turned icy, what’s on your minds? Have you shoveled your roof? Are you worried about it?
This morning’s Press reported that school district 271 wants to increase the size of most of their classrooms from 600 to 900 sq. ft. as they remodel. Ok by me as long as they stay within the $5.1 million they already have for the project. Any thoughts on this or other topics?
The article reported that one teacher had said the 600 ft2 classroom was too small. The article didn’t state the class size in this “test.” Too small for what? I would have liked for the district to post the teacher’s written report on its website so we might better determine if the test was valid or if the results were cooked to achieve a desired result. What were the evaluation criteria? Or was the subjective judgement of one teacher enough?
The article also said the Long Range Plan Review Committee had given her an alternate plan to present for the school board’s approval Monday night. I could not find that alternate plan on the school’s website either.
Why is 900 ft2 a magic figure? Is there a good reason for not building a 900 ft2 prototype to be sure it will be adequate before requesting approval to build 24 of them? A square 900 ft2 classroom would be about 30 ft on each side. A square 600 ft2 classroom would be about 24.5 ft on each side.
Comment by Bill — January 3, 2009 @ 12:38 pm
There were 28 students in the prototype classroom. The average class size at Lakes is 30. The classroom is very nice, and the district did a great job remodeling it, but it’s just too small. I applaud Hazel for giving it a go, but you’ve also got to take the word of the people who use the classrooms, the teachers.
Remember that the 2002 remodel was based on a general cost-per-square-foot guess by an architect. There were no solid plans other than “remodel Lakes.” Sad, but true. With this plan, the District is moving forward with a remodel that has a true plan, priorities, and goals. E.g., they’re trying to be accountable with the taxpayer’s money.
Hazel is trying to get a lot done and doesn’t have the luxury of time to do it in. Though it’s been 7 years, only now is action being taken on the Lakes remodel. That’s good news, and the rush is understandable given the amount of catching-up that has to take place. I do not expect that such a rush will be the norm in the future.
Comment by Dan — January 3, 2009 @ 3:38 pm
Dan,
The article said one teacher, not “teachers.” I would have much preferred that evaluation criteria would have been established and that several teachers would have been required to participate in the prototype classroom’s use. Have them do independent evaluations, then meet with Bauman and the Finance Committee to discuss and compile the recommendations. I suspect that 600 ft2 is not adequate, because if the average class size is 30, then that means some classes are larger. But if that’s so, then it ought to be easily proven and explained by the teachers (plural) in terms even a dolt like me can understand. If you suspect I still don’t trust Hazel Bauman, you’re partly right — I don’t completely trust her. She is well on her way toward earning back a lot of the trust betrayed by Harry Amend and his cohorts, but this isn’t a case where trust is necessary. The teachers (plural) should be able to articulate the need for more space with clarity and precision. That makes her case all that much stronger. The best way to avoid the rush in the future is to lay a solid, defensible foundation and process now. It’s the process. Frankly, I don’t care what some loopy architect with a sweetheart contract says is needed; I too would want to hear from teachers and parents. If parents and teachers can make a good, solid case for exceeding the minimum requirements for size, safety, etc., they might find a lot of voter support provided the reasons are clearly justified and easily understood.
Comment by Bill — January 3, 2009 @ 7:21 pm
Those classrooms seemed small when I went to school there in the 60’s. My guess is the 900 sq. foot figure is more of a practical consideration. If you divide up three 600 foot rooms into two rooms by taking out the middle walls and adding one you end up with two decent size rooms of 900 square feet. The depth of the rooms is probably fixed because of the interior hallways so the only real flexibility is in the width of them. This is not based on any facts, just a guess from an ‘ol CHS student, class of ’69.
Comment by Dan English — January 3, 2009 @ 8:09 pm
Check out how “Mr. Ed” Jay Baldwin starts his column in the Press today:
Obviously Mr. Baldwin hasn’t read Dale Carnegie.
I suppose people who are concerned about education and don’t agree with Mr. Baldwin are “inane” and making personal attacks and giving misinformation. That’s not the way you build a community, Mr. Ed. All opinions are valid. As soon as the self-appointed elite in this town recognize that, the better we all we be.
Comment by Dan — January 4, 2009 @ 9:22 am
Dan English, Amazing history you have here sir! The research I did before the last levy, showed that the south side of the Lakes building was built as one huge room originally. A few years later they split it up into classrooms, so those dividing walls are not weight-bearing. It makes sense to enlarge some of the classrooms,as you described, and I’m assuming the south side rooms are those targeted for the upgrade.
Comment by mary — January 4, 2009 @ 10:32 am
Design competition was once the standard for new and remodeled schools. The competition brings forth innovative solutions something that certainly could be utilized for Lakes Middle School.
Comment by Susie Snedaker — January 4, 2009 @ 11:25 am