By Concerned Mom of 3

October 22, 2007 1:47 PM | Link to this

Does the phrase “The squeaky wheel gets the grease” mean anything to anyone? I can tell you from experience- the squeaky wheel does get the grease in Dayton Public Schools. I think the same will prove true with our State Legislators. I urge you to write those letters today. The way schools are funded is bad for everyone involved… the students and the taxpayers.

By Laura

October 21, 2007 3:29 PM | Link to this

Mom of 3: A big part of my comment about changing schools was to highlight the fact that in schools where the parents are vocal and know the upper administration and board members, the planned split classes didn’t happen. Sometimes, it’s “who you know”. You brought up some excellent recommendations to make a split class succeed. However, none of those are going to happen. The district did offer teachers a couple of chances to attend after school (translate: on your own time)inservices for a couple of hours. There should have been a couple of days of assistance for teachers who have never done anything like this. There is no way anyone is going to get extra planning time or a para. Few schools have parent volunteers. Most teachers are now expected to handle all but the worst of discipline problems themselves since there are no assistant principals. In all the years the reading coaches have been in place I have never seen one actually teach a group on a continuous or regular basis. As most of my coworkers frequently say: There is no way DPS is going to do those things because- they make sense!

By Buford

October 21, 2007 1:13 PM | Link to this

Steve, I have been beating the “Funding Drum” for awhile now. Just this week I received a response from Luckie’s office, regarding school funding. His Legislative Aide said there is a lot of discussion in the State House about school funding but there is no bill currently in being or being pushed. I agree, if we voters do not hold our elected representatives (including the Governor) accountable for solving this mess, they will continue to waffle around on it and try to appease a portion of the voters by pointing out the Senior Citizens have just received some tax relief (and therefore just MIGHT be more inclined to vote for future property tax levies). Problem is, the system is still wrong. I also am just one person, but I influence five other adult voters in my tribe, and I will not support any future property tax levies associated with school funding, nor will I support any elected official who has not weighed in on correcting the funding problem.

By steve

October 20, 2007 8:06 AM | Link to this

Old Prof I have fired off letters to Claytom Luckie and Tom Roberts in hopes of getting them to get the ball rolling on this school funding issue. I urge other bloggers of GOTB to do the same. Roberts is a lame duck and I am apprehensive about his ability to accomplish anything worthy of merit but Lucky is a freshman legislator and an ex board member. Hopefully he will recognize the importance of this issue and caucus with other members who share this same goal. If he can’t deliver we need to start looking for candidates who will. I am willing to push this issue as far as I can but I need the help of everyone that will listen. Write your reps and senators and let them know how you feel today.

By Concerned Mom of 3

October 19, 2007 6:54 AM | Link to this

Laura- You seem like an experienced teacher with high standards for your students and your own children. It is a rare occasion when I don’t agree with your GOTB posts. I think switching schools is a drastic measure for the struggling first grader in the split class… I would like to know more about what interventions have been put in place at the building level. Mixed classes can have some really awesome benefits IF the teacher is organized enough to manage it. (Student mentors can develop leadership skills, all of the students have the opportunity to develop independent study habbits, students also have to take responsibility for maintaining a quiet, peaceful learning environment, etc.) Administrators can’t throw a teacher into that kind of a situation without appropriate supports in place. 1. Training. 2. Extra Planning time to make plans for two grade levels. 3. A Para/Parent Volunteer to make copies and prepare materials. 4. Have the reading coach spend time working with students in ability groups. 5. Have a clearly defined discipline plan for students who make bad choices that cause repeated disruptions to the learning process. (To name a few…) I think a creative teacher with the support of her principal could successfully meet the needs of the first and second graders. My advice to dad would be to meet with the teacher, express his concerns about his child, and find out what the teacher needs in order to meet his child’s needs. (Maybe his child is showing the first signs of a learning issue. Perhaps a multi-factored evaluation is in order.) If meeting with the teacher doesn’t resolve any issues, then consider making a change. With the recent changes in DPS, I suspect the teacher is as overwhelmed as the struggling first grader.

By Steve

October 19, 2007 6:09 AM | Link to this

Thank you Laura, I couldn’t of said it better myself. First grade is a very important step in regard to learning how to read period and when that is over looked children struggle.

By Mary

October 18, 2007 10:35 PM | Link to this

Laura, where did I say everyone should be treated the same? I was simply reminding you that there are also some kids who would be better off to be advanced. For the life of me, it is hard to keep up with all the inconsistent educational theories about what is best for a child and the classroom. Your comment about two or more grades in the same classroom is essentially what many educators propose teachers do with inclusion and differentiated instruction. So what gives, what is the theory this week? Sorting kids by ages, good or bad? Sorting kids by abilities, good or bad? Sorting kids by sexes, good or bad?

By Oldprof

October 18, 2007 10:24 PM | Link to this

Steve, I perceive that you’re a sincere fellow with legitimate grievances. But I’ve long noted, on this blog and elsewhere, that the average citizen is expected to do too much governance—this is the era of “do it yourself” government in Ohio—the legislators you elect are not willing to do their jobs and devise funding formulas for schools (or mental health, or highways)—no, YOU must vote on every tax proposal (and if you don’t pass it, the state won’t kick in your share of the funds they’ve already collected). You say don’t blame “lazy legislators” but look—General Motors is in peril, do you blame the union line workers (like Rush Limbaugh would), do you blame the plant managers, or do you blame the people at the top? Iraq is a mess-do you blame the troops on the ground, the regiment commanders, or the commander-in-chief? The school mess will NEVER improve if the conditions at the top don’t. Were you aware that DPS is required to have certain administrators just to receive funding? Best estimate I can get is that there are 11 administrators here for no reason other than the legislature has mandated them. I’m not going to say that this school board is perfect and holy—I’ve criticized several of them on this blog—but in the end, they’re burdened with trying to make a school system function with an illegal, inadequate system of funding—were you aware that the state decided to mis-count the enrollments in DPS and to require them to refund 9 million, which is why the levy was “emergency” and, in part, so large? It’s hard to communicate all of the information on a blog where the interface won’t even allow paragraphs in a post—but in general this school board has tried its best to pull the district up despite having loonies and sycophants running the show in Columbus.

By Laura

October 18, 2007 7:46 PM | Link to this

Mary, So because you were advanced and were also motivated to move up to be closer to your friend and sibling, that means everyone else should be treated the same way? Steve was referring to a situation where the child in question was struggling and not at all motivated to do work above her grade/ability level. When most children are just beginning to learn to read in first grade and are expected to be fairly proficient readers in second, you are setting a child up for constant frustration when they can’t do the work. It’s a nice thought to say teachers can teach two grades at once, but it is highly unlikely that it will actually happen. There just isn’t enough time in the day to teach all the indicators for one grade, let alone two.

By charterschoolhater

October 17, 2007 11:55 PM | Link to this

What oldprof tells us is true. DPS is now spending 60% on instructional. What he does not tell you is that 60% has not improved the education of the children one bit. And the bd of ed really believes that new school buildings is the cure all for the educational lapses. What a joke.

By Mary

October 17, 2007 8:46 PM | Link to this

On the otherhand, Laura and Steve, some first graders would be happy to be doing second or third grade work. After two weeks of first grade about 50 years ago, I was asked if I wanted to go to the second/third grade classroom. I had no problem with that. My best friend was in the second grade and my sister was in the third.

By School Supporter

October 17, 2007 8:38 AM | Link to this

The Ohio Attorney General ought to be concerned with ensuring equal educational opportunity to district students; the State Auditor ought to take an interest in district accountability to cost-effectiveness goals; and the Ohio Secretary of State ought to take an interest in the role of board members being explained to voters. That said, the League of Women Voters of the Greater Dayton Area (rather than the Dayton Daily News) might help voters understand how these expectations interplay and how to assess board candidates in the region. But don’t forget, the local school boards are responsible for ensuring students graduate with the skills to cast an informed ballot. Now, how is this mess the fault of the DDN or the General Assembly?

By Joe Lacey

October 17, 2007 7:30 AM | Link to this

I never accused the board of trying to silence me and I never indicated that anyone was under Gail Littlejohn’s Thrall. Oldprof is posting stuff that just didn’t happen.

By Laura

October 16, 2007 10:31 PM | Link to this

Steve, I agree that having a 1st grader do mostly second grade work is ludicrous. If the 1/2 split were correctly set up, low seconds would be paired with 1st graders and primarily taught 1st grade material. On the other side of the issue is that there are schools in DPS that were not forced to combine classes. Perhaps you should consider trying to move your daughter to one of the schools where the voices of the parents are truly heard. They are there. You just have to look.

By Scott Elliott

October 16, 2007 9:54 PM | Link to this

Steve, I can confidently tell you Percy Mack did not have a private bath installed.

By Steve

October 16, 2007 9:35 PM | Link to this

Seems the word slander is getting quite the work out on this blog site in recent days. I stand firm in my convictions that this board has not done an adequate job in it’s stewardship of our district. I am unable to attend meeting because I serve as an officer in my own organization with meeting nights that co-incide with the BOE. I still read the blogs and newspaper to formulate my opinion. Furthermore my children have attended DPS since the early 90’s and it will be well into the 20 teens (if I choose to keep them here) before all of them complete school. Since the Children first board has come on board the only thing I felt they did right was promote the building of new schools. I campaigned for it went door to door with fliers and spoke it up every chance I got. This body had to know the adverse effect the charter schools were going to have in this endeavor in respect to student enrollment numbers yet they pushed for it promising new schools for all the city and then they balked. My neighborhood doesn’t get a new school now and that irritates me. I am irritated that GOOD teachers were let go due to tenure while the bad one’s got to stay (recognizing that is a union issue as opposed to a board issue) I can’t recall anytime my children have come home and said the Super visited their school or any other top administrator. It irritates me that my youngest child is forced to do 2nd grade work because the board and all it’s infinite wisdom decided to combine 1st grade with 2nd grade. This has been dificult for her because key concepts in 1st grade are not taught. This has put her at an unfair disadvantage. Talk about NCLB. It irritates me that this board changes the names of our schools without consulting the public so that the kids would be able to better identify with their ethnic heritage, what does that do to the non ethnic kids, can you say alienation or feelings of disenfrachisement? It irritates me that everytime another job comes down the pipe some of our members want to jump ship. That shows me how much they really care! It irritates me that when the union rep tries to address the board she is told she had her 5 minutes now sit down. It irritates me that instead of going for a more realistic levy they pulled out all the stops for a large levy when jobs are leaving this distric in droves. And then they blame they blame the community. It is neither realistic or prudent to do such a thing. I am tired of the buck being passed to the “lazy legislators” instead of tightning the purse strings at the local level. (and I understand the strings attatched necessary administrator requirement that comes with the grants) The fat can still be trimmed. I don’t care if board members have to drive 10 15 or 20 minutes to get to a meeting if it saves this district money. I didn’t ask them to run for that office they decided on their own to do it so don’t cry to me. Additionally if it is true that the Super had a private bath put in his office so he could be fresh for meetings in a 20 million dollar building that too is a waste of the tax payers money. With that being said.. WILL YOU PLEASE RETRACT THE ACCUSATION OF SLANDER STATEMENT OLD PROF!

By Scott Elliott

October 16, 2007 9:31 PM | Link to this

Gerber, you misunderstood my comments about serving the community. At the corporate level, the company that owns the paper does play a wider role as a community partner in a variety of ways. But at the reporter level, again, we are insulated from that as much as possible. I do feel my job amounts to community service, but never in the way you suggest — by pushing an agenda. My goal, always, is to give readers as complete, accurate and fair accounting of the news so they can make informed decisions. Every single person on the planet has biases, tendencies and a unique world view. Again, cynics believe journalists don’t take their responsibility to remain objective seriously. I am telling you, the journalists I know around the country take this much more seriously than many people believe. We are constantly asking ourselves if our biases, tendencies, world views or personal likes and dislikes are getting in the way and we work very hard to keep them in check, be fair and give people as complete a picture of the news as possible. Our paper has many examples of stories that ask tough, uncomfortable questions about the community. They are perhaps not the same questions you would ask, but they are challenging questions nonetheless that seek to get at core truths about things people need to know about.

By Gerber

October 16, 2007 6:46 PM | Link to this

Scott, You have hit on the root of bias in the media. Today’s so called journalist think that it their job to serve the community, not to report the news. This attitude will cause you to pick the stories that you think will best serve the community, and to not write about the stories that you deem harmful to the community. This is why the paper is flooded with stories on the benefits of passing a school levy, but it is hard to find a news story about how the same results might occur if the salaries and benefits of government workers were reduced. Both options will achieve the same results, but one story fits your world view.

By Jefferey

October 16, 2007 5:42 PM | Link to this

“Wake up, if this guy ever gets the control he wants and his �real� agendas finally comes out the closet I bet YOU won�t be in his plans!” Hmm, what kind of agenda might that be, that’s in ‘the closet’? The GAY agenda perhaps? The DDN op-ed board might have legitamate beefs with Lacy, but I suspect others are using this as cover for less kosher reasons to be against the guy.

By Oldprof

October 16, 2007 4:34 PM | Link to this

Steve, as Mark Twain noted, a lie can get halfway around the world while the truth gets its boots on. DPS has restructured in the past eight years; now over 60% of total budget is spent on instruction, unlike the practices of the Williams administration. There is NO proof of financial mismanagement, just Joe Lacey repeating the charge again and again with no proof. And yes, the district has made deep cuts across the board—a sad consequence of Ohio’s unconstitutional funding system, supported by lazy legislators. Vote for who you want, but please provide soem facts to back up your allegations—or at least look up the meaning of the word “slander.”

By Informed Voter

October 16, 2007 4:02 PM | Link to this

Having attended a candidate’s night presentation I know the DDN Editorial Board made the right choice. This isn’t about Lacey, it’s about who are the best candidates for the board and you’d have to be blind not to see the incumbents really are the most qualified for the role. I admit the editorial endorsement was harsh on Lacey, but I’m afraid it’s true folks….heck the guy has all but been put out of the Democratic party for his unorthodox antics. So are they also out to ‘get’ poor Joe? Sounds a little paranoid to me…could all these folk be wrong, or are you all just so hung up on blaming someone you are an easy target for Lacey to use in his bid to finally become a big MAN? If the guy cared so much about the school district why did he try to become the county treasurer recently (they too said NO!)? This would have required he quit the board, some loyalty! All this talk about teachers and I’ve never seen him in my school. All you have to do is get off hiding behind your computers and attend a candidate night….Lacey’s girls aren’t ready for this role and it’s really sad there is so much hatred and tunnel vision out there that you all want to conveniently overlook that reality. To blame these incumbents (many of whom have only been on the board a few years or less and made none or few of the decisions so often complained about here) really makes me wonder what the real issue is here. The way I see it you have one guy who wants total control and has proven himself too psycho to handle it and a bunch of ‘followers’ of his who really have no clue or capacity to handle the role. I can only hope this city is not this naive and that all this gibberish is just Lacey’s little buddies spouting off. Wake up, if this guy ever gets the control he wants and his ‘real’ agendas finally comes out the closet I bet YOU won’t be in his plans! He’s using your emotions and your naively allowing it!

By Steve

October 16, 2007 10:17 AM | Link to this

Let’s see, bloated administrators at the top, silencing of the oposition, mis-management of funds, inability to pass a levy. playing the blame game. Unwillingness to admit to problems and take responsibilty for failed actions. Slashing teachers jobs(unless your a friend of ms braithewaite) while not eliminating unessesary and duplicate post at the board HQ. Classes that have been doubled in size and combined (like 1st and 2nd grade @ Loos elementry)the whole fiasco of the new buildings that were reduced due to charter schools rise in enrollment. You can’t tell me that this board was unaware of those ramifications. These are the laurels this BOE is riding on and wants the publics’ support??? Folks we really need to put forth a concerted effort to rid this district of these inept self serving board members. I say Yes to Nerny and Crisp but Thompson and Mims are nothing more than 2 rubber stamps waiting on the opportunity to draw a check for nothing. Let’s get er Done!!

By Mary

October 16, 2007 9:47 AM | Link to this

Maybe the non-endorsement” by the Dayton Daily News of Joe Lacey, who won anyway, will also work for the other candidates this time.

By PK

October 16, 2007 8:23 AM | Link to this

I am also for Joe Lacey. He definitely does have a voice and he seems to be the one who is most supportive for teachers and children.

By Scott Elliott

October 15, 2007 11:43 PM | Link to this

Dan, it may be hard for you to accept, but yes, there is a wall between the editorial staff and the reporting staff at our newspaper and at other papers. Reporters are managed by editors, but our chain of command is completely divided from the editors who run the opinion pages. They cannot give reporters orders and we cannot direct their editorials. This is a matter of journalism ethics. I know many cynics refuse to believe that the media is capable of adhering to ethical standards, but this is, in fact, taken extremely seriously by professional journalists at quality news organizations. For most of us, journalism is as much a mission to serve the community as it is a job. If we cared only about our financial best interests, there are far more financially rewarding ways to make a living. The truth is there are lines we don’t cross. And at least in our newsroom, this is one of them. Editorial writers are the opinion makers. Reporters strive to just present the facts.

By Dan Kennedy

October 15, 2007 11:03 PM | Link to this

So reporters are not managed by editors? It may be newspaper convention to namelessly publish on the editorial page without a byline, but that doesn�t make it right. Why is the standard that it is OK to attack on the editorial page while playing off the folks down the hall, at the same media company, as unbiased reporters? That is a �Chinese Wall� mentality that I do not accept, to me, you are all �The Dayton Daily News�. The DDN is the only game in town; it should hold itself to a higher standard. BTW, the editorial page, actually every story, especially editorials, needs a persistent comments section that does not drop off comments. Also, your response to �report inappropriate posts� is wholly inadequate, the search feature does not meet my needs and neither does the archive.

By steve

October 15, 2007 8:44 PM | Link to this

I am for Joe Lacey, after reading excerpts from meetings and all the blogs on GOTB it’s clear a witch hunt is taking place not only by the BOE but the DDN editors as well. I applaude Mr Lacey for his standing up to the status quo and shame on the rest of the Kids Second team. The waste has to stop and stop NOW. TO those encumbents up for re-election I hope you enjoy your last days of sponging off this community and the rest will go when your up for re-election cause we’ve had it with you

By Oldprof

October 15, 2007 8:16 PM | Link to this

Joe Lacey, are you now disavowing that you stood up and claimed recently that “Republican Gail Littlejohn” had inspired the board to silence your voice? A claim that, while not literally using the word “puppet”, suggests that the rest of the board is under her thrall. A claim which also is wrong on other points, not the least of which is that no intelligent observer can claim not to have experienced your voice.

By Mary

October 15, 2007 11:58 AM | Link to this

I totally agree with Dave’s last comments. Seems everybody wants to hetergeneous the classroom, homogeneous the boards and the leadership,then call in consultants because problems are never confronted and differing views are never welcomed. We cannot handle diverse students if we do not have diverse board members.

By Dave

October 15, 2007 9:27 AM | Link to this

I will agree that the board needs to be able to work with each other. But there is equal danger in having a board so agreeable that they do NOT bring differing viewpoints to the discussions. For a famous example, consider the Bay of Pigs invasion. Almost all the cabinet members thought the plan could not work, but they all agreed to it because they felt a united front was important. The same problem can occur with school boards, editorial boards, etc. They really need to bring all the viewpoints together, discuss the issues, and make an agreement that everyone can live with. That’s a big challenge, but that’s the job they chose.

By Scott Elliott

October 15, 2007 8:31 AM | Link to this

Joe, arguing about whether the editorial board effectively made its argument is, of course, fair game. Ellen Belcher is the editorial page editor. I think she is the right person to handle a complaint no matter who wrote any individual editorial. Mary, the qualifications of the editorial board members that matter are these — they have been chosen by the newspaper to write editorials and be the paper’s editorial voice. They are generally chosen for their good writing skills, deep knoweldge of a wide variety of issues and understanding of the community. I agree that you ought to be able to find some bio info on the editorial board members on our Web site. I’ll suggest that. But I can tell you the current board contains no former sports writers or booster parents.

By Mary

October 15, 2007 7:28 AM | Link to this

Well, Scott, I think the editorial board owes it to the public to tell us who they are and what their qualifications are for recommending the best school board candidates to public. From what I have gathered, most of them are former sports writers and booster parents who do not know squat about other education issues.

By Joe Lacey

October 15, 2007 1:29 AM | Link to this

Scott, I assumed it was Ms. Belcher who leveled the accusations against me. If it is the editorial board accusing me of disruption or any of the other vague wrongs, then they should cite the instances. That’s not asking them to be balanced. They do a disservice to the public when they don’t tell us just what it is that they base that opinion on. If they think that something that I’ve done is disruptive, fine, tell us what it is and give us an opinion. How can I respond if I don’t know what it is that they are calling disruptive? In 2001, I went to the DDN to discuss a different editorial, I was taken to Ms. Belcher’s office where she was talking with Martin Gottlieb. Mr. Gottlieb promptly left saying that my beef was with her, not him. That tells me that the writer of the editorial is indeed relevant.

By Scott Elliott

October 14, 2007 10:47 PM | Link to this

There’s a lot of good, healthy debate going on here over the DDN’s school board endorsements. Some commenters, however, seem a bit confused about the purpose of newspaper endorsements and the role of the editorial board. Editorials represent the voice of the newspaper’s editorial leadership. The direction of the editorials are jointly agreed upon by the editorial board, which is currently made up of three editorial writers and the editor-in-chief, and written by one or more of them. Who writes the editorial is irrelevant. All the board members agree on the direction the editorial will take first. For decades newspapers have written editorials and made endorsements out of a sense of responsibility to try to be an independent judge of the issues and candidates. The guidance offered by the editorial board is as important as any individual thinks it is. Some people use endorsements as a guide, others don’t. The choice is always up to the reader to decide what to do with the information. Editorials are the opinion of the editorial board. They are not required to be balanced, as a news story would be. This process of endorsement is entirely separate from the process of impartial news reporting that the news staff conducts. No reporters are ever given votes in the editorial process. And likewise, editorial writers do not influence news coverage. We are sometimes a resource for each other. The editorial board may rely on my reporting to inform its opinions and I have, at times, learned about something important by sitting in an editorial board interview with a candidate. Different people sometimes complain that the editorial board may favor certain points of view. That is always open to debate. But the editorial board is not allied with any political party. In fact, our endorsements, in recent years, are pretty evenly divided between the major parties. It is not true that any party prevents its candidates from speaking with the editorial board. Candidates of all stripes pass through here every election cycle.

By Sara Walker

October 14, 2007 10:24 PM | Link to this

I guess all of the candidates NOW know why the GOP is NOT permittig the DDN to interview ANY of their candidates for AT ALL. Althought I must admit that this is the 1st time that the DDN is “miquoting” thier own party members…I find this quite amusing.

By Joe Lacey

October 14, 2007 10:15 PM | Link to this

Ms. Belcher’s editorial is all name calling and no facts. Where are the instances of my “meddling”? What were my “disruptive” acts? Ms. Belcher has yet to point them out to me. What does she mean by “thoroughly political”? If I’ve done anything on the board that put politics ahead of the interests of the district, can she tell us what I did? When did I “not work well with others”? Is it when I asked tough questions that exposed problems with Dayton Public Schools? What are the “tangents that are meaningless and unimportant” that she referrs to? What bad advice did I give to Shirley Crisp? By not addressing the facts, Ms. Belcher invites readers to assume the worst. But the facts don’t support them. And as for Oldprof, when did I assert that anyone was a “puppet” of Gail Littlejohn? Rick, I’d also like to know when I was too skeptical and abrasive? Let’s all stick to the facts.

By Dan Kennedy

October 14, 2007 9:47 PM | Link to this

Why can�t the ‘editors’ at least put their names on an article when they attack someone? Everyone should remember that this paper trashed Lacy the day after the election and before he even served a day on the DPS BoE.

By David

October 14, 2007 8:57 PM | Link to this

The DDN editoral was useless. It should have detailed information and then left the choice up to the reader. Instead it selected whom it wanted and smeared the rest. I can’t wait to see what the paper gives in real information about the Human Services Levy: a double whammy of replacement instead of renewal for the level, which increased the tax; and then adding 2 mills onto that. It should have been two separate levies. After the Szolke fiasco with high pay, retirement pay, and reemployment “because he couldn’t be replaced” I’m voting “No.” The schools still got lots of Human services money to subsidize the busing with County-wise money. What next? For school board, ignore the DDN and read the information from fliers and websites.

By Eve

October 14, 2007 8:50 PM | Link to this

Joe will probably sue the newspaper.

By Laura

October 14, 2007 8:45 PM | Link to this

I have to basically agree with Mary on this one. I don’t think any organization or celebrity should endorse a candidate simply on the grounds of who they are or what they are. It makes me think that the editorial board believes voters can’t make intelligent decisions on their own. If that is the case, then even the editorial board should not be influencing them, just providing them with the information. I would like to see the editorial board do as Mary said and simply give the public the facts. I would also accept the board explaining why a specific skill or experience would be relevant to the position.

By Washington Twp.

October 14, 2007 8:36 PM | Link to this

It seems that the editorial was as much about slamming Joe Lacey(and it was a pretty big slam) as it was about endorsing candidates on their own merits.

By Rick

October 14, 2007 8:22 PM | Link to this

My thoughts about Mr. Lacey are schizophrenic. He is right to challenge the Board in its lockstep approach. While I think the Kids First team’s overall achievements have been positive, the purchase of the old R&R building was a financial and public relations disaster. On the other hand, I have heard he can be too sceptical and abrasive. Mr. Lacey, couldn’t you learn to disagree without being disagreeable? You could have a very positive effect on the Dayton Public Schools.

By Barb

October 14, 2007 8:15 PM | Link to this

Seems amazing that the person endorsing the candidates spends no time in the actual school building working with the children. I am not sure you would hear the ones in the trenches talking about all the progress that has been made. As a matter of fact I think over and over again you have heard teachers say things are progressively worse. Who to trust and vote for - I am asking that question daily.

By dirk sniggler

October 14, 2007 7:22 PM | Link to this

That editorial really made me want to support Joe Lacy and those who think like him. Just because he’s not a Miller-Valentine candidate doesn’t mean he deserved that weak and lame slam he received. Looks like itt doesn’t pay off to step on the toes of the corporate media industrial complex in this town.

By Anne

October 14, 2007 7:17 PM | Link to this

The editorial shows incredible bias paired closely with a great deal of ignorance. To endorse the people who allow the admins to remain top heavy while cuts are made in schools where children are affected, this is insane. Because Joe Lacey does not walk the party line , bow his head and remain silent, he is disruptive? How about he is the ONLY one being responsible? He is the ONLY one who really seems to care about what is in the best interest of the children. It makes me wonder if the people who write editorials are afraid. Are they worried that someone may step out of line and question decisions made by those with power? Obviously the editorial staff has a lot of power, being able to deem who they feel is worthy and to try to paint those who are failing in a positive light. The light is on, most of us can see, regardless of the false, unresearched, unsupported article written and published. The public can see. Let’s hope enough people with real knowledge get to the polls. The people who are tired of the miserable job being done by the board will look to Joe Lacey for leadership, maybe Dayton will stand a chance then.

By Oldprof

October 14, 2007 6:55 PM | Link to this

Thanks for sharing that, Ms. Crisp. Perhaps now you’ll appreciate that current board members might feel in the face of Joe Lacey’s frequent assertions that they’re all puppets of Gail Littlejohn.

By nancy

October 14, 2007 6:47 PM | Link to this

I, as a candidate for the Board, was disappointed that the DDN editorial board seemed to address the candidates’ affiliations rather than their abilities. Because Joe Lacey puts my name on a flier that he passes around the community does not mean that I agree with his philosophies on the Board of Education or that I will be his “mouthpiece.” Most of my friends know that I speak for myself and judge issues on their own merit before giving MY opinion. Joe has patiently answered my many questions about how to run my campaign, yet Mario and Lee have graciously done the same. So the affiliation the DDN alludes to is not founded and leads me to question if they even looked at the experiences I gave them in my resume. If readers would like to judge me for themselves, they may visit http://nernyfortheboard.wetpaint.com.

By Mary

October 14, 2007 6:44 PM | Link to this

I find most of the Dayton Daily News endorsements gossipy and superficial. Sometimes some useful facts are buried in there some where. There seems to be no depth that would be useful to an informed voter. Give the voters the facts you know, acknowledge what you don’t know, and let the voters decide themselves. For example,do not just say so and so did volunteer work at the schools. Tell us what areas they volunteered in. Was it boosters or classroom? What inspired them to run? What are their personal experiences and involvment with the school system, etc? What is their education experience? What are their concerns about education?

By crisp

October 14, 2007 5:54 PM | Link to this

I was a bit disappointed in the attitude of the editorial staff. To assume that I or the other “new” candidates for the board are some kind of Joe Lacey puppets is insulting. I agree with Joe on many of the issues but I am sure I would also disagree with him as well. The fact that Shelia Taylor gained the Democratic Party endorsement was mentioned although I didn’t see it mentioned that any of the incumbents interviewed for that endorsement as well. As for the year round school issue, I am asking in all honesty when the other schools in the area are going to that schedule? Surely if it makes the kids that much brighter, everyone is going to jump on that bandwagon. My opposition to the schedule was there wasn’t any consideration given to teachers or parents when the decision was made. I really feel the DDN did a disservice to me and the other challengers for the board by implying a friendship with Joe Lacey makes us somehow unfit for office!

By Who 2 Believe?

October 14, 2007 5:17 PM | Link to this

You’ll never see/hear me write/say this again: I hav to agree with the DDN editorial board. They are right about the candidates and about this Lacey character.