By teachermom

January 16, 2007 6:00 PM | Link to this

Mary, I think I mentioned the fact that I am not that familiar with where sports dollars go. I still continue with the same opinion that it would likely be mismanaged, either way. Ask around to see the confidence level of how money is used in the district. Above all, academics should be the major priority.

By teachermom

January 16, 2007 6:00 PM | Link to this

Mary, I think I mentioned the fact that I am not that familiar with where sports dollars go. I still continue with the same opinion that it would likely be mismanaged, either way. Ask around to see the confidence level of how money is used in the district. Above all, academics should be the major priority.

By Mary

January 15, 2007 8:30 PM | Link to this

“teachermom”, if I correctly understood your comment about monies from sports, you need to realize despite ticket sales and some revenue, sports in schools do not make money. Any revenue from sports offsets a very small part of the total costs of athletics. This is also true for over 85% of college Division I athletics departments. In theory these subsidies could be used to pay for more classroom teachers and professors.

By teachermom

January 15, 2007 4:47 PM | Link to this

I thought about the idea RICLEWIS mentioned. It sounds like a very nice concept, and would be the ideal situation for athletics. I am not very informed on where monies from sporting events go, but I seriously doubt it would ever trickle down to servicing students. If the BOE won’t account for where money has gone now (with the little they have), think of the waste that would happen with any extra. The ultimate concern of the district should be academics, not sports. I can only imagine the discipline problems that would take place in a unified high school. Surely, if behavior problems are not being addressed now, how could containing a larger number of students like that be realistic ? Support is not being given from downtown on student discipline/safety issues. The students don’t take the consequences seriously when the upper-administration behaves like defense attorneys for them. As far as the possibility of Ms. Littlejohn being tired of money-hungry people (I assume you mean teachers,teachers want to be paid like everyone else. Nobody has asked for more than they deserve or what other educators are getting. You might want to rephrase the “money-hungry” statement to just plain “hungry.”

By Keith

January 15, 2007 11:37 AM | Link to this

I hope that the post about making Roosevelt II a powerhouse wasn’t just talking about athletics… but I’m afraid it was. The problem is Dayton needs to improve discipline and control and responsibility of parents and community toward academics in its high schools. If the hope is to improve academic outcome across the whole group of students, a massive, high population high school isn’t the answer. Management by capable principals is the answer; they need the support of an administration putting their money where their mouth is rather than padding the upper administration and supporting real education occurring in all classrooms all the time.

By Scott Elliott

January 15, 2007 11:03 AM | Link to this

Good point, Old Prof. I’ll avoid that phrase going forward. The rumor that had been going around was that a coalition of candidates might be forming to oppose Littlejohn and her allies on certain issues following a similar “team” approach. At least so far, that doesn’t appear to have come together.

By Oldprof

January 15, 2007 8:35 AM | Link to this

Am I being oversensitive if I think “anti-kids-first” is an unfortunate choice of name for those honorable people whose goals differ from those of the Littlejohn/Gatliff/Isaacs/Rusch coalition? Maybe “alternative-to-Kids-first” would be a better name for the ticket that Joe Lacey says he’s not putting together?

By RICLEWIS

January 15, 2007 3:59 AM | Link to this

Maybe Mrs. Littlejohn is stepping down because she is tired off of the money hungry people. Ya know those whom think that what they are paid determines their love their CHOSEN profession. Maybe she realizes that it makes no Political sense to take State funds away from public schools to funnel into “FOR PROFIT” schools. Maybe she also understands that ROOSEVELT HIGH SCHOOLS needs to be placed on the roster of Historical Places of education, and the funds used to build over 6 new highschools could finance the complete renovation & upgrade of said such High School ultimately leading to Dayton having one central, dominate HIGH SCHOOL. Seriously consider the possiblities of Dayton having one high school in Roosevelt for the entire School District. All of the kids that attend those “FOR PROFIT” schools would miss out on the Athletic advantage of having a Power House like the New Roosevelt. Dayton Public Schools Sports Programs would then and only then outclass, outrank, and outperform any other from the surrounding communities (i.e Centerville, Tacumseh, Cincy, Alter…) FEEL FREE to contact me with your ideas on how to RALLY/LOBBY for a economically viable School System, after all how can we produce a better future if we continue to gentrify it.