Radio Free Hamilton presents news on the proposed Merger: Students Present Petition Opposing It
Note, by the way, that in a merged school (if it did merge according to the plan) this collaboration probably wouldn't happen -- it would certainly be harder. That's because the sixth grader would be physically going each day to a different school, and spending a chunk of her non-school time on the bus between. One advantage HCS has always had is the chance for older and younger kids to interact, and to develop habits of interaction that last through childhood. The proposed merger plan wouldn't destroy all of this, but would certainly hinder it.
Long-term readers may remember that I've suggested a possible later "merger" plan, if enrolment declines far enough: a plan in which Andrews Elementary would be closed and sold, Morrisville & Eaton elementary and middle students would go a few miles north to the current main building, but at least their last few grades would come to Hamilton, possibly the whole high school. That would leave Hamilton's inter-grade interactions intact; Morrisville already gave them up.
Or then again, that might not work either.
Two HCS girls -- fifth grader Ava Robertson and sixth grader Molly Stahl -- last week presented the Board of Education with a petition bearing the signatures of 56 of their classmates. The kids added their names to the list of people opposed to the two districts becoming one.
Here's why:
- Class size
- Transportation
- Familiarity of schools.
Note, by the way, that in a merged school (if it did merge according to the plan) this collaboration probably wouldn't happen -- it would certainly be harder. That's because the sixth grader would be physically going each day to a different school, and spending a chunk of her non-school time on the bus between. One advantage HCS has always had is the chance for older and younger kids to interact, and to develop habits of interaction that last through childhood. The proposed merger plan wouldn't destroy all of this, but would certainly hinder it.
Long-term readers may remember that I've suggested a possible later "merger" plan, if enrolment declines far enough: a plan in which Andrews Elementary would be closed and sold, Morrisville & Eaton elementary and middle students would go a few miles north to the current main building, but at least their last few grades would come to Hamilton, possibly the whole high school. That would leave Hamilton's inter-grade interactions intact; Morrisville already gave them up.
Or then again, that might not work either.
Tom, I am trying to reconstruct a comment I wrote yesterday, but lost in the mysteries of your b;og. First, I asked why you suggest that HCS might be able to merge with MECS on its own terms later, if the demographic projections prove correct and enrollments continue to go down. You think that if the Andrews school were closed, MECS might choose to merge and send secondary school students to Hamilton. However, I was very impressed by the MECS Board of Education at the meeting on Oct. 21. Unlike the way they are pictured by Hamilton’s anti-merger group, these citizens are deeply concerned about good education and anxious to recover the programming they have lost due to the need to control taxes. One person in the audience wanted to explore whether, rather than merge, they should raise taxes. I have a strong impression that if Hamilton turns them down, Morrisville will seek consolidation with one of the other schools still available. The possibility of closing Andrews to save funds was mentioned, but it was indicated that there will be strong community resistance.
ReplyDeleteI also want to say that students who passed the petition against merger, being one grade apart, would by the “SES road map” only be in different locations for one year when one of them begins middle school and then another later before coming together again in high school. My daughters at that age were anxious for new experiences-- at all-county events and various camps. Are children more timid now? And do not kids socialize during bus rides—and could they not use electronic devices to listen to language lessons or music while on the bus? Rather than fighting the merger, Hamilton students and parents might be working for the SES Road Map, since it would have Hamilton students spend more time on a bus only for the three middle school years. Are our children less able to handle such a challenge than the many children in cities who use public transportation to get to school? There are excellent schools in the region that have merged, have wonderful facilities and programs, and the kids have adjusted to bus rides: e.g., Vernon-Verona-Sherill, Sherburne-Earlville, etc.
I surely hope that the students who started and signed the petition and their parents will attend the open house in Morrisville on Nov. 9th and that the parents will walk them through the road map. They should learn to consider a proposal carefully before making up their minds. For example, I see no evidence that classes in the merged school would be larger—though the number of students in a grade would be. Hamilton now often has too many students in a grade to make reasonably sized classes when divided only into two, so three are needed. A merged school might more economically have classes the recommended size. Can we help our children to understand that and that the cost to tax payers of public education (almost $20,000 annually per student) rules out decisions just on the basis of comfort and familiarity? Don’t they ever look forward to knowing new teachers and new classmates? Can parents point out to them the advantages of the merger in increasing some offerings and in stabilizing both schools economically?
Wanda Warren Berry
Wanda, I'm not sure I understand. You say I think "that if the Andrews school were closed, MECS might choose to merge..." No, I think that if we had a merger that actually closed a building, then overall costs (adding both districts together) would fall significantly, which is not the case with any of the merger plans we were considering...they use almost as much money in increased bus rides as they save in decreased teachers+other staff, and if transportation costs continue to rise then they may end up using more money in increased bus rides than they save. I'm not opposed to all mergers, only to those which don't seem individually to make sense. SES felt that the one-less-building option was not yet available because enrolment hasn't declined enough. (Lately, our elementary enrolment has risen.) If you think that long bus rides are good, feel free to make that case and I'll post your argument on the blog or website. Personally I took some long bus rides to some schools and walked or biked to others, and was glad that my kids could walk or bike to HCS. I've worked and studied on buses (and trains, planes, ships)...it's not impossible but it's definitely a disadvantage.
ReplyDeleteYou say of the MECS Board of Education that "Unlike the way they are pictured by Hamilton’s anti-merger group, these citizens are deeply concerned about good education..." and I'm really startled. I think I'm a member in good standing of "Hamilton's anti-merger group", and I have to ask: who has said what, to make you think we don't believe MECS Board members are not deeply concerned about good education? I would personally be astonished if they weren't, and I'm sure that the Morrisville CAC members are, and I have no reason to think any differently about members of the community in general. I don't know what to say, except that you seem to be disagreeing with a group of people I've never met, people in whose existence I find it hard to believe...so I can't answer for them. I can say that I don't think the merger would result in "stabilizing both schools economically," but I've already explained this at considerable length, so I guess I'll leave it at that.
When chatting with a highy responsible member of the community last week, I reported how impressed I was with the concern expressed by the MECS Board of Education. She said she was given the opposite impression by a Hamiltonian who was opposing the merger. I said that It had been argued to me that MECS's readiness to cut programs rather than raise taxes indicated a different level of commitment between the communities.
ReplyDeleteSo person X thinks that person Y is not impressed by the MECS Board. I doubt that I know person Y, unless person X is wrong. And you told person X that "it has been argued to me", presumably by some person Z, that ... well, person Z appears to hold a logical fallacy which we might call the "everything is values" fallacy; you could have pointed person Z to my remarks on the subject, or you could simply have noted that "circumstances alter cases" and our circumstances are different (and apparently getting more so, economically). Instead, you seem to have assumed that person Z is representative of "Hamilton's ant-merger group" and that Z's logical error is one we all make, even though we've explicitly pointed it out as an error. This is also a logical error. I'm sure we make some too, but accusing us of errors which we aren't making is not an obvious path to progress.
ReplyDeleteIf you want to argue against person Z's error, I have no objection...and no great interest, unless person Z wants to come forth and say what they actually said and why. Confronting anonymous people who aren't there, assuming beliefs for them that they may not believe at all, is an easy but pointless way to "win" arguments or at least to convince yourself that you've done so. I'd rather think about the actual case for and against this particular merger vote; having spent a long time on it, I'm against, and I've said why at considerable length already, but I'm certainly willing to listen to arguments on the other side.
I only reported the conversation as evidence that I was not the only person who had been given the impression that anti-merger people think MECS is less committed to quality education than HCS. I am not going to give names, but that interaction was heard by others, though not my conversation with Z. Enough of that...my main concern in my comment was to ask you to explain why you have said several times that in the future, if Andrews closed, there might be a merger. I was trying to say that I doubt MECS would wait around for that.
ReplyDeleteI believe that M-E parents want the best for their children in terms of education, just like parents in Hamilton do. But after studying as much information as I can about the merger, I still concluded that it is a bad idea for many reasons. To imply that you can only be against the merger if you think poorly of Morrisville parents/students is not fair. A merger is a marriage with no possibility for divorce. You can like an respect someone a lot and still feel that rushing into marriage is a bad idea!
ReplyDeleteIf anyone wants to know some of my reasons for choosing to vote against the merger, despite my respect for M-E parents, here are a couple: For example: The merged school district would be huge, leading to higher fuel costs, environmental damage and bus times for children. The state has reneged on its financial commitments in the past, so I don't trust the incentive aid. Research shows that smaller schools are better for disadvantaged and diverse student populations. The SES study disregarded data that the school age population in Hamilton may be going up, or at least staying stable. Mergers are unavoidably disruptive for students and potentially lead to tensions and conflict. That can't be good for students, so unless a merger has guaranteed benefits that outweigh these costs, they should be avoided.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Carolyn. I know that both HCS and MECS parents want the best for their children. This is a matter of situation....what is the best situation for the students....not whether one community is "better" or "worse" than the other or if a community is "for" or "against" change. Quite frankly, the state's economy is on shaky ground still, this incentive aid given for the merger is not a sure thing. The key focus in this proposed merger debate should be the students and their well-being. Sadly, school buses are not well supervised since the driver needs to focus on the driving you can't expect adequate supervision and because of this, they have become a wonderful opportunity for bullying and inappropriate behavior. Increasing time on the bus increases these incidents. In the 1960's, Pennsylvania merged a large number of their school districts. Here are the findings of the Pennsylvania School Boards Association, Education Research & Policy Center findings published in the April, 2009 issue, Merger/Consolidation of School Districts: Does it save money and improve student achievement? issue. "As districts and schools become larger, those who make decisions affecting the population become more removed from those most affected." "There is no evidence that a consolidation of schools will reduce expenses." "Students in larger schools tend to be more disconnected, which often requires special programs to address dropouts and discipline." It's for these reasons that BOTH MECS and HCS students would not benefit from a merger.
ReplyDeleteIndeed I hadn't answered the direct question, "my main concern in my comment was to ask you to explain why you have said several times that in the future, if Andrews closed, there might be a merger." My reason for saying that is that I think it's true; if Andrews closes, there might be a merger that would make financial sense. Of course you're right that other factors might intervene, and in particular of course MECS might merge with somebody else. I hope they find a solution that actually helps them; this one wouldn't.
ReplyDeleteHmmm… again I lost a message that I tried to send more promptly to respond to comments from Carolyn and Heather. Finally taking time to reconstruct some of it, and after hearing Dr. Bowers again last night at the Hamilton Club, I will comment only on what is now in my mind since I heard it again last night. I want to issue a small caution about counting too heavily on upcoming hiring at Colgate to reverse the enrollment trends. First, some of my friends in the next generation started postponing retirement when there was the economic downturn, since they saw a dip in promised retirement funds. Note that the mandatory retirement at age 70 for faculty was revoked in NY more than 20 years ago. Some, like my husband and myself, chose to retire nevertheless, largely out of ethical commitment to open opportunities for younger people. But others in our cohort have continued to teach much longer, because they love teaching (as did we) and many advise continuing in a career that one loves in the longer lifetime many now have. Second, numerous people whom I have seen hired over the last decades did not bring children into the school district. Many are childless, others do not live in Hamilton, others have small families, often only one child. Third, I have read of a virtually global—or perhaps it is Euro-American—decline in birth rates. That is not bad for the environment, but it indicates profound changes in the way we do some things, including public education.
ReplyDeleteOf course, Colgate hires many people to the staff as well as the faculty—some bring children into the school, some do not—and some are here for a while and then move away. Such is life!
Much of the research about the value of small schools would still apply to the particular merged school under consideration, since it still would be small, fitting into the size widely recommended. Much of the opposition I hear, however, is not because of the size of the merged school, but the geography of the merged district. It is clear that the longer bus rides would only affect HCS kids in middle school if the road map is adopted. Unfortunately Morrisville-Eaton is much more dependent on busing and their district extends too far north-- but HCS kids would never have to travel up there unless sports competitions asked them voluntarily to go to games in Canastota or Oneida. And the SED is not apt to be too impressed by the size of the merged district, since they say many are much larger.
By the way, I have not yet had a chance to ask: how are kids and families in the now merged athletic teams handling travel to Morrisville for practices and games? Having grandchildren who are active in many athletic teams I am constantly surprised at how far parents and children are willing to drive for these activities. Guess in an earlier era we did some of that for musical opportunities.
Indeed, prediction is hard (especially the future.) Colgate and other factors have reversed the trends projected by the SES Study, but I agree the new trends are unreliable too, as well as all the other trends involved. I'm confident that the economics of education will change radically because of changing technology, but I don't know whether any particular trend will accelerate, continue, or die off; there are clever people with lots of data, predicting that colleges like Colgate will mostly disappear in another generation. That would surprise me, but I've been surprised before. Such is life, indeed. The trend for workers to be more productive in cities may continue -- but it's a technological trend also, and there are counter-trends (e.g., telepresence) which could bring a return of population to the open spaces. We don't know. I'm *reasonably* sure that NY's continuing fiscal troubles, with K-12 aid such a large fraction of the total budget and cost per student averaging double the national average (with no obvious improvement in outcomes), will force radical change on schools with heavy aid dependence, but maybe not. It's even possible that NY's fiscal trends will improve to the extent that the state will be able to keep all of its promises to pensioners, Medicaid recipients, and K-12 aid alike. That would *really* surprise me... but I've been surprised before. And it's possible that fuel costs will go down, not up, so that the road map would represent an actual cost savings for a generation or more -- that would be only moderately surprising, though it's still not the way to bet. Basically the proposed merger is a way of gaming the system: it does not reduce actual costs (unless fuel price drops) but it does satisfy the forms to receive an increased share of state taxes, according to requirements which were set up by state legislators who wanted to encourage mergers that did save actual costs (as thousands of past mergers have done.) If you believe that the formulas won't change, then perhaps you should support the merger -- there's no evidence that it will help kids academically and some evidence that economically disadvantaged kids will be hurt, but as you say it will still be a small school and perhaps they won't be hurt very much; perhaps the increased subsidy from downstate taxpayers will be worth it. If you believe the state's Budget Crisis Task Force or similar sources, then you probably shouldn't support the merger. It's a gamble. I think it's a gamble with a small chance of winning a little and a large chance of losing a lot, so I'll vote against it, but it's a gamble and it might win. Such is life.
ReplyDeleteTom, this is really interesting, especially that you end in talking about "a gamble." I have been wondering today, now that NY authorized the additional gambling casinos in yesterday's vote, whether Cuomo is right about the income helping the schools. I voted against the authorization, thinking that gambling appeals to the most vulnerable and gambling addictions cause great pain. But one can hope that some good might come out of what I see as an unfortunate vote. In addition, it is interesting to me that both in Hamilton and at the meeting I attended in Morrisville, people are counting on the very substantial donations that Colgate has been making to HCS in addition to continuing to pay taxes they are not required to pay on some properties. So your mulling over of Colgate's future is relevant. I also know that I am not the only one who has worries about having public education depend quite heavily on private contributions. I have the specifics of Colgate's support for the school if anyone is interested-- I do not have them in front of me, but in this year alone the extra $300,000. dollars Colgate has given each of four years when added to the school taxes it pays voluntarily add up to about $823,000. While I trust Colgate, I might not trust some private corporations upon whom we might become dependent-- i.e., would they try to influence the curriculum and program. Is it healthy for HCS to depend so heavily on private donations because it cannot get more state aid, being so small. Will Colgate be able to continue such donations without cutting other programs? And I have heard through public education professionals that it would not be unheard of for HCS eventually to lose state aid completely, if it gets ever smaller and refuses a merger. Since you were on the advisory committee, you probably know more about that than I. My own preference is to "gamble" on democracy-- the merger would gamble on creating the best education possible for more students in a school of optimal size. Morrisville people are anxious to re-establish AP courses, etc., that their financial situation caused them to cancel. I would like to see Hamilton help them to do so. Having tutored a Morrisville student for the GED, I know that there are bright kids there who for one reason or another dropped out. Like students at HCS, my student would not vote for the merger, because kids prefer what they already know. But my daughters said that when they visited the Sherburne-Earlville School they kept regretting the lost opportunity of that merger. I wish some of out students and parents would visit Morrisville next Saturday-- it is a quite beautiful school. Shouldn't we encourage open minds?
DeleteThat's a interesting juxtaposition. I voted against the casinos for the same reasons you did; well, we lost, and there's always the possibility that not too many people will be hurt, and they won't be hurt too badly.
DeleteI see it as a tax on those least able to pay -- and yet it is a tax paid by choice and I'm reluctant to make people's choices for them, so I had mixed feelings throughout. And I'm certainly prepared to "gamble" on democracy, as the least-bad method of making mistakes in community resource allocation at local, state, and federal level. But I don't see the merger as creating the best education possible; it is a way by which our locality can trick our state into subsidizing an "economy of scale" decision that doesn't actually save money unless fuel costs drop, because the "diseconomy of scale" is also real and in this particular case dominates. That's actually a bet against democracy at the state level -- we'd be betting that the state will go on making an irrational subsidy in the face of increasing other needs for the revenue. Of course there's also the bet that the state will have the choice; it may not. I understand you want to help Morrisville, but (as Carolyn and Heather are saying above) this doesn't help Morrisville. It's quite likely that the Sherburne-Earlville (Smyrna) merger was a good thing; the cost factors were different. We can point to it as a reminder that merger promises are typically not kept, e.g. the plan people voted on included schools kept in Earlville and Smyrna which then disappeared, but we can't say that "Sherburne merging with Earlville worked, therefore Sherburne-Earlville merging with Hamilton would have worked and Hamilton merging with Morrisville would work." It really doesn't work that way. There were costs and there were benefits; the costs shown in our merger study are understated (unless you think fuel prices won't rise) and the benefits barely cover those costs (even if you think that the state can magically keep all its promises, going forward). If the merger does go through, I'll go back to thinking as I did on the casino vote that "there's always the possibility that not too many people will be hurt, and they won't be hurt too badly," but it's really not a good bet.