Open Enrollment in the State of Ohio

should Ohio Change

  • Total voters
    40
queencitybuckeye said:
We were the fastest growing district in the state for several years. Are we somehow supposed to not only build schools as fast as possible to give classroom space for our residents, but build even more for outsiders? Ridiculous.

Government decisions are best made at the most local level possible. One size doesn't fit all at the state or federal level for this issue.
Click to expand...
Most districts with open enrollment set a cap on class size. My local district has been denying open enrollment applications for elementary aged students for years because they simply don't have the room for anymore students.
 
neofootball10 said:
Many state have county school districts to cut down on admin costs. m
Click to expand...
Conversely, this is how so many small districts have been able to remain in place. In many districts, the school system is far and away the largest employer, and the local community doesn't want to eliminate their neighbor's job.

Nothing wrong with that as long as the locals are willing to pay a higher local level of tax to support such a policy. If our legislature ever addresses DeRolph in a meaningful way, though, a lot of the districts that howl the loudest about "equitable funding" are going to be in for rude awaking when "equitable expense" comes down at the same time.
 
CatFoodFlambe said:
Conversely, this is how so many small districts have been able to remain in place. In many districts, the school system is far and away the largest employer, and the local community doesn't want to eliminate their neighbor's job.
Click to expand...
I think this is an oversimplification. At least in western Ohio, people take immense pride in their local districts and are fiercely independent. They may get along fine with their neighbors 6 miles away but they want no part in merging schools, and they’ll make that known when voting.
 
serpico said:
They may get along fine with their neighbors 6 miles away but they want no part in merging schools, and they’ll make that known when voting.
Click to expand...
And IMO, you and the neighbors are the only legitimate parties in any discussion about merging. Not people in other parts of the state, and not elected yahoos from Columbus nor D.C.
 
queencitybuckeye said:
And IMO, you and the neighbors are the only legitimate parties in any discussion about merging. Not people in other parts of the state, and not elected yahoos from Columbus nor D.C.
Click to expand...
That would be true if not for a fact that a large portion of the money the school districts are spending comes from the state. With that money comes involvement.
 
The state should eliminate school districts and combine the districts to avoid duplication of administrative service and the state has the right to do it since they are in charge of it and pay for most of the schools in poor districts. We have way too many school districts in Ohio and since the state has not made funding a priority, it should be more cost effective and that includes stop doing life support for poor areas and combine them with others who can afford to pay for the schools.
 
I agree that there are definitely school districts that should be combined, we have entirely too many in Ohio. The question I have is would it really save money? It's easy to say yes, because you are getting rid of superintendents, and other upper administrators; however, there will be increased costs, especially transportation and other logistics. That combined district will need to either get more buses, or the buses will most likely have to drive further. There will be other logistical issues as well, especially if the combining districts have vastly different facilities. For instance, if District A is combining with District B and District A has all newer, modern buildings but District B has buildings that are poorly maintained to simply obsolete for today's educational environment, you are going to have pay to bring those building up to par with the others. These are just a couple of quick examples.

Now, the other debate that will happen will be over local control. As many have stated, too many communities are extremely proud of their district and people moved to those areas for that exact reason. They like the idea of having that local school much more than a consolidated school system. People will lose their minds if some of consolidation actually happened. And some of these districts are so close consolidation is WAY overdue....... In Hamilton County for example, Lockland and Wyoming should be 1 district.... the high schools are seriously about a mile a part, separated mainly by the railroad tracks (and they could probably merge in with Princeton & Reading too). Another could be quite a large district. If you use Mt. Healthy High school as a center point, within about a 5 mile radius, you have Finneytown HS, North College Hill HS, Winton Woods HS, Northwest HS, Colerain HS, and Aiken HS. That's just silly to have that many high schools and districts in such a small area. We could go on forever about this, but again, the locals would lose their collective minds, especially if a wealthy school district had to combine with a poor one.

The last issue will be who decides what districts merge? What will be the goal.... a certain number of students per system? Would it be distance traveled, because in the rural areas, combining districts could mean hours on a school bus.

Our system is so messed up right now, that any fix would have to come from the state, and it would have to blow the whole thing up and start over. The issues of open enrollment, charter schools, and vouchers, have only compounded the problematic issues of schooling in Ohio, they haven't remedied any of them.
 
Bottom 200 school districts should be eliminated. Way too many.
30 kids in a classroom not ideal only to head off to colleges with 150-400 in some lecture halls.
 
Sportsfan79 - The school districts that have less than 50 or so students, I could understand looking into consolidation of those schools. However, schools who graduate 80+ students I believe are sustainable and have value. Former Presidential candidate Ross Perot said it best. It may seem to make financial sense to consolidate say four schools with 100 kids per class into one school with 400 kids per class. However, you lose out on participation from kids. Instead of 4 valedictorians you only have 1. Instead of 20 kids who are starters on the basketball team you only have 5. It is important to get kids to participate, to win or lose, to learn how to follow as underclassmen and then lead as upperclassman. For kids to experience success and failures.

Yes a big school can sometimes have more resources - more foreign language options, more advance math or furious/councilors, etc but they do not necessarily show they are run any better than smaller schools. I think the economic status of a school would be a better indicator of success/failure than the size of the graduating class.
 
I would vote to eliminate the top 100 schools in enrollment. They are far too big for the personalized education that actually works.
 
Reason true education reforms cant happen in education. Reason goes out the door for local pride. Districts who should have collapsed or eliminated schools years ago keep operating costing the whole system more money than it should. The only reforms are done at state level and they usually are scams to make money and fail even worse than the regular schools in the state.
 
I humbly submit that a small local district that is funding their needs above and beyond the state contribution should have the right to continue doing so if they meet a state standard for education.

The problem is going to be with the smaller districts that can't or won't do so. I grew up in a county that went from eight high schools to two in early 1960's (the "City" district for the county seat, seven small township schools in to a "county" local SD). Thirty years later, there was still substantial bitterness in the county system over the merger outcome (which coach was hired for which program, what principals kept their jobs, which teachers got their first choice of classes, etc.).
 
George S. Patton said:
Keep the Bona Fide Move in place.

"A student whose parents make a bona fide move completely out of one school zone into another may transfer all his/her rights and privileges to the member school that serves the area where his/her parents reside"

You want to transfer, M O V E.
Click to expand...
Sorry but it doesn't always work out that way. A lot of times there aren't any houses available in the preferred school district. I'm in favor of the idea that if you can get or provide transportation to the school of your choice, then they should be able to attend as long as the school has space for them. Also in favor of paying taxes & etc for the school your children attend not necessarily where you live. I believe those that do not have children should choose what school they want to pay taxes to within reason.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top