new, new school issue.

I just want to go on record as saying i think the school system is finally on the right track by openly considering going to two high schools city wide.

for those that dont know....clark, hammond, and gavit hs' would all close with clark and gavit remaining as middle schools.

under this idea one new high school would be built, just north of the current hammond high.

thus far this is all that has been announced, and the school system is reportedly investigating how to make this possible

ive always maintained my issue with the former plan, wasn't that we needed a new school, clearly hammond does. but the old plan made no accounting of what would be the future to clark hs. but this new direction is a start to a potential eventualy plan that could benefit all. however there are a few issues i think the schools need to hammer out.

first. the location of the new school...as it is is a large portion of private property as well as the civic center and carreer center would need to be purchased and or removed.

but i think at least part of this idea needs to be altered.

either the school system needs to look for land a couple miles north of the proposed sight for a more central location (sheffield estates anyone?)....or work out a deal with whiting to allow the northern most clark students to attend whiting hs, while whiting jr high kids could then go to clark jh getting the whiting jh kids out of the high school there...and the high school kids out of clark, would increase enrollment capacity at both schools. (perhaps those north 119 and east of calumet could go to whiting hs with the rest to the new hammond high?) and school busses would be a necessity, but if lake central and everybody else south of ridge road can do it, i dont see that as being that hard to organize.

furthermore. this would have to pass a referendum to have any chance of ever becoming a reality. so it is imcumbent on the school board to show exactly how this plan could better serve hammond's needs (and possibly whitings too). personally. i can see long term value in building a new high school...if we went too two highs schools (three never made sense to me, since i knew clark would have to be addressed in the near term as well). consolidating services (teachers, counselors, administrators, etc...) could save significant money if done properly. and while no jr highs would close in the short term...the added jr high space would leave at least a potential of closing an extra jr high or two down the road.


and the old design for the new school...as has been argued about ad nauseum...was just to expensive for mine...and many others taste.

but if the school system can show the public that the new school wont actually be a prohibative tax burden...and can also ease the concerns that are out there regarding the potential new boundries then maybe this could be a spark of an idea that has a chance.

theres a long way to go to turn the idea into a plan i can support. and probably an even longer way to go to turn this into a referendum the public would support. i'd advise the schools to be patient with the public...for they arent going to suddenly turn around and support this right off the bat. but by april 2010 (next election) or more likely nov of 2010...this could be a very interesting ballot initiative.

but the best thing about this...is the school board has finally acknowledged that they will need the publics support for whatever they do come up with....and finally have realized they cant steamroll this project through regardless of the publics wants.

I think if the school city is concerned about costs, building on the present Hammond High site is the most affordable option since the school city already owns much of the land needed. During the study sessions, the cost of land acquisition to build at the Hammond High site was estimated at about $1.5 million. Given the drop in real estate prices, that figure would drop. The price of building materials has dropped also, which should save quite a bit of money. One of the things that drives up the cost of new schools is the fact that every new school that is built is a custom design, which adds millions to the cost. Mitch Daniels had discussed going with "vanilla box" designs for new schools as one way to lower costs. Have you been up to Sheffield Estates lately? In the past few years, the ownership of that mobile home park has invested quite a bit of money upgrading.They have replaced at least 50 of the older units with brand new models. I believe that it would be very costly to buy them out. I am really glad to see that the school board is trying to come up with a plan to provide Hammond students with a quality high school like every other town in NW IN has.

under this idea one new high school would be built, just north of the current hammond high.

I expressed my thoughts on this change in thinking OTOB under Tiger's regular school board meeting report. In short, I too am skeptically optimistic.

But what is "just north" and why not use the current HHS property?

What's wrong the career center land and the HHS land?
I've not seen any renderings yet, but this sounds a little better than what they were proposing before.

It will never pass on a referendum vote, it is dead in the water.

Hispanic Hero wrote:

It will never pass on a referendum vote, it is dead in the water.

I wouldn't necessarily call it DOA but it had better be a pretty well thought out realistic proposal.

I will always favor the one high school plan but this does seem more thought out then the last plan. Lets give it another year and maybe they will come up with even a better idea

i think the main problem with the current proposed site is distance from the north end of town....and the perception of that location by people up north.

right or wrong, changing the location, imo would be a lot easier than changing the perception. and to me, that perception could be harder for the school city to overcome then then anything else, in terms of getting a referendum passed.

Hispanic Hero wrote:

It will never pass on a referendum vote, it is dead in the water.

With the economy the way it is, this will never pass. Unless the SCH can get the money from Obama, this thing has about as much chance as a snowball in hades.

The school admin. is so far out of touch from reality. How about expelling the trouble makers for a change? I would be happy if Hammond had the highest expulsion rate in the state for few years. Want to bet how much our "test scores" would improve?

It is interesting that the issue of Obama providing the funding for a new school is being brought up in this thread. From what I have read about the stimulus program, it is unlikely that federal stimulus money will be used like to help Hammond at this time. Inadequate funding of public schools in urban areas is a problem nationwide. However, I believe that the same community organization model that Obama used to become elected can be used to win this referendum. It is just a matter of bringing together the stakeholders of Hammond's schools to use their time and money to ensure the referendum passes. I believe that many parents in Hammond care just as much about their children's future as parents in Hobart or Crown Point. The key to gaining public support for a new high school in Hammond is going to assuring taxpayers that their money will be used wisely to construct the new high school at the lowest cost possible.

Hispanic Hero wrote:

The school admin. is so far out of touch from reality. How about expelling the trouble makers for a change? I would be happy if Hammond had the highest expulsion rate in the state for few years. Want to bet how much our "test scores" would improve?

This would be a good place to start, but the SCH will never do it, as they get paid from the State per pupil. IF they would expell ALL of the troublemakers, who BTW are generally the ones with the lowest test scores, the index would go up immediately. Also, the ripple effect will kick in, as the kids who truly want to learn, will no longer have the disruptions from the bad kids. This will improve the test scores overall.

Building all the new schools, has been a total failure. The SCH was trumpeting how all the new facilities was going to improve the test scores, and instead, the test scores are getting lower. Morton, Hammond High, and Eggers are so low, the State could take them over at any time. The ONLY school that showed a slight improvement, was Clark, which is in a building almost as old as Hammond High's. Eggers, which was built in the 1970's, was totally gutted and redone 7 years ago. Eggers is absolutely horrid, and I do not totally blame the Staff there, as the backup they need, is not coming from 41 Williams. IMO,it looks like 41 Williams want's Eggers to fail.

Tiger1 wrote:

Hispanic Hero wrote:

The school admin. is so far out of touch from reality. How about expelling the trouble makers for a change? I would be happy if Hammond had the highest expulsion rate in the state for few years. Want to bet how much our "test scores" would improve?

This would be a good place to start, but the SCH will never do it, as they get paid from the State per pupil. IF they would expell ALL of the troublemakers, who BTW are generally the ones with the lowest test scores, the index would go up immediately. Also, the ripple effect will kick in, as the kids who truly want to learn, will no longer have the disruptions from the bad kids. This will improve the test scores overall.

Building all the new schools, has been a total failure. The SCH was trumpeting how all the new facilities was going to improve the test scores, and instead, the test scores are getting lower. Morton, Hammond High, and Eggers are so low, the State could take them over at any time. The ONLY school that showed a slight improvement, was Clark, which is in a building almost as old as Hammond High's. Eggers, which was built in the 1970's, was totally gutted and redone 7 years ago. Eggers is absolutely horrid, and I do not totally blame the Staff there, as the backup they need, is not coming from 41 Williams. IMO,it looks like 41 Williams want's Eggers to fail.

People do not go into education to become rich. Most educational professionals eschew higher salaries that they could earn in other fields for the personal satisfaction of making a difference in the lives of their students.
I have yet to meet a teacher or am administrator who would deliberately work to make a school fail. I would like to hear what you are basing your opinion on?

People do not go into education to become rich.

People don't got into teaching to be rich at least. But the administrators who have the power to grant contracts I'm not so sure about in every instance.

IF they would expell ALL of the troublemakers

I have said a few times there should be an alternative school just for a case like this. So far about the only way to kick a troublemaker out of school is with home schooling and that's pretty rare and probably only reserved for convicted and registered sexual predators.

So why not have an alternative school based on home schooling but with a licensed teacher and a low teacher to student ratio. Maybe put it in a portable trailer that's not in use or something.

I have a feeling that this approach would benefit both the good students and even the troublemakers themselves. Let them get their diploma based upon the standards the state has set for the home schooled and be exempted from some of the mandates in regular school.

And I'd be willing to bet that this really would be good in many cases. That said we have another issue to consider, being constantly transient students. I'm not sure what to do there but I believe they are in significant numbers among the trouble makers. Still, we really outta try something besides hope the problems will correct themselves.

Like a charter school!!

Na, it would have to be way too big to accommodate all the good kids. Really, if you think about it, were you to remove the worst kids some of those on the borderline may fall on the good side due to positive peer pressure. Positive peer pressure doesn't work as well when the thugs are ruling the halls.

Funny thing though. Many people who oppose vouchers to put kids in actual good school systems have no problem supporting a brand new charter school option that may or may not work out as desired. Yet it would certainly be cheaper just to use the vouchers to utilize already proven programs. Go figure!

Mirage wrote:

IF they would expell ALL of the troublemakers

I have said a few times there should be an alternative school just for a case like this. So far about the only way to kick a troublemaker out of school is with home schooling and that's pretty rare and probably only reserved for convicted and registered sexual predators.

So why not have an alternative school based on home schooling but with a licensed teacher and a low teacher to student ratio. Maybe put it in a portable trailer that's not in use or something.

I have a feeling that this approach would benefit both the good students and even the troublemakers themselves. Let them get their diploma based upon the standards the state has set for the home schooled and be exempted from some of the mandates in regular school.

And I'd be willing to bet that this really would be good in many cases. That said we have another issue to consider, being constantly transient students. I'm not sure what to do there but I believe they are in significant numbers among the trouble makers. Still, we really outta try something besides hope the problems will correct themselves.

This is really the key to improving the public school systems nation wide. At one time urban districts produced numerous Rhodes Scholars, including Hammond and Gary, who went on the become successful professionals. While the curriculum has been updated, much of what produced these scholars still remains. There also remains dedicated teachers, parents and students who want to do well. What has changed is the enormous amount of time and energy spent attending to students who disrupt the classroom, and the increasing number of students who are adament about doing what they want to do instead of what the teachers request of them. All this takes away from the teaching/learning process and the results are evident. New schools, performance based pay, frequent testing of students, lengthening the school day and year will not make an impact unless the detractors are removed from the schools and placed in a highly restrictive atmosphere where their behavior can be "modified."

There was another fight at Hammond High yesterday. The Administration needs to get real tough on this issue, and start booting the brats out.

voter3 wrote:

How about a juvenile delinquent facility for the bad ones? My point is the solutions are there, they are not being applied, for whatever reason. Threats of lawsuits and vocal parents have intimidated teachers and principals into little or no action in all but the most extreme cases.

Voter,In the past I've suggested a dedicated social adjustment school to weed out the troublemakers.

Artie60438 wrote:

voter3 wrote:

How about a juvenile delinquent facility for the bad ones? My point is the solutions are there, they are not being applied, for whatever reason. Threats of lawsuits and vocal parents have intimidated teachers and principals into little or no action in all but the most extreme cases.

Voter,In the past I've suggested a dedicated social adjustment school to weed out the troublemakers.

This sounds like a reasonable solution to a growing problem. Also, if the other borderline kids see the clamps being put on the bad kids, they just might start to straighten up.

If you want to see 1st hand just how bad the problem is, come over to the neighborhood by Eggers School about 3:40pm(they have a longer school day than the other Hammond Schools). You will not believe your eyes. EVERY DAY, there are fights, property damage, swearing, drug dealing, R-X rated touching, etc. These same Eggers kids will be going to Hammond High in a year or 2.

I have personally seen these kids drug dealing, damaging my neighbors property(I chase them off or call the police), blocking the streets, fighting(especially on the bike trail), and get smoochy-smoochy . The noise volume is unreal, as these kids are screaming obscenities at the top of their lungs.

Tiger1 wrote:

If you want to see 1st hand just how bad the problem is, come over to the neighborhood by Eggers School about 3:40pm(they have a longer school day than the other Hammond Schools). You will not believe your eyes. EVERY DAY, there are fights, property damage, swearing, drug dealing, R-X rated touching, etc. These same Eggers kids will be going to Hammond High in a year or 2.

I have personally seen these kids drug dealing, damaging my neighbors property(I chase them off or call the police), blocking the streets, fighting(especially on the bike trail), and get smoochy-smoochy . The noise volume is unreal, as these kids are screaming obscenities at the top of their lungs.

For the past 4 years, the school city of Hammond has been prevented from building a new high school which would stabilize the crime ridden area around Hammond High and hopefully attract families who have strong work ethics and are willing to parent their children. As long as Hammond allows it's plans to rebuild Hammond High to be held hostage by a few disgruntled landlords, this is the kind of future you can look forward in your neighborhood. I for one would not live there or invest money where you live. There is a show on TV called "What would you Do?" that videotapes people ignoring problems or failing to help others in need. As long as you stand by idlely and allow the gangbangers to overrun your neighborhood, they will know it's OK to do so. Part of the reason there is no drug dealing in the streets in the Woodmar neighborhood is because we won't stand for it. At some point you have to quit whining on the boards about how your neighborhood sucks and actually try to improve things.

A new building will not change the kids that go to these schools. I also know Tiger does not stand by idlely and let this neighborhood go to hell, she has taken action many times.

Monkey, I gotta say that the Code Enforcement, Street Department, and Police have been very helpfull. The Police Chief himself came here to talk to the riff-raff we had in the apartment building on my street. He saw a drug deal happen right in front of his eyes, when he came here. He also saw over 30 people pour out of that 2 bedroom apartment.
CE has come here and has got an eye full too. You would not believe how many people just throw their trash in the alley, and not in the cans either. The Street Department has repeatedly been here to pick up items piled in the alley.
I appreciate all of their efforts, and I realize that there is other parts of the city that need attention, too. I wish I had a magic wand to wave around over here, and change this neighborhood back to where it was just a few years ago.