Tomorrow afternoon begins another youth lacrosse season. Our Dartmouth teams compete in the Under 11, Under 13 and Under 15 age groups with teams from 22 other towns in the South Shore, Cape and Islands region of the Mass Bay Youth Lacrosse League (MBYLL). We practice and play our home games at Friends Academy. Thanks to headmaster and lacrosse enthusiast, Andy Rodin, for use of their fields. Our practices are 5:15 to 6:45 PM Tuesdays and Thursdays. Our eight games are played from April 6 to June on Sunday afternoons. We are always looking for coaches who have played the game. So if you fit that bill and want to coach, give a call to me at 774-274-7738.
Our program and the MBYLL follow the policies of the Positive Coaching Alliance which promotes sportmanship and learning life lessons. Our league doesn't have standings, playoffs or all star teams. We play to have fun and to learn the game of lacrosse. I think the MBYLL is the finest youth sports organization I have ever been associated with and if you love lacrosse, you'll love our program.
I get the pictures that I use on my blog from the LAX.com website. As you can tell, I am a Syracuse lacrosse fan. Just thought I ought to give them credit for the great pictures.
Monday, March 24, 2008
Youth lacrosse coaching
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
23 comments:
Having played lacrosse as a youth in HS I appreciate the speed and stamina this game requires and your willingness to coach it.
I find it ironic that Friends Academy provides the fields as next year I'll have the 2 kids going there since I no longer want to keep my kids in the Dartmouth system given the unlikeliness that they will get the override they need to improve their performance.
You'll love Friends! I wish all the kids in Dartmouth could go there, but I really feel that the public school gives the best education with regard to diversity and preparing children for the real world.
LaCrosse is a great addition to Dartmouth and I thank Bill T. for starting this program. My kids loved it, and loved Bill. Thanks!
Actually this is the first year that we will practice at Friends. Last year we played our games there and prior to that we practiced and played at UMass Dartmouth. The headmaster has been kind enough to offer their facilities and we took him up on it. Thanks to our neighbors at UMass for giving us a leg up to start.
Bill,
Honestly, you don't have an inkling to the schizoid political persona you project to parents? In spite of your lacrosse program, which I commend you for, I don't see how you can expect any parent of children currently in the school system to actually consider voting for you. I watched your library interview, and listened, dumbfounded, when you said Dartmouth has never provided a "great" public school sytem, and in fact has no real responsibility to do so. You feel that if we can maintain "good", it is good enough. I have a deep, deep problem with this attitude, and so cannot support you. I believe all parents should be very concerned, should you succeed in getting on the select board, but here's a plug - Watch Bill's interview!
That's just it though about Friends all the kids can't go there, only the people with the means. For the rest of us we're stuck with having to convince this town to spend a little more than the absolute minimum every year. It's a real shame its come to this in Dartmouth.
I have spoken to many parents with children in the school system who will be voting for Bill because they are unhappy with our current leadership. These are intelligent, hard working people with professional careers who feel it isn't about the money but doing what is right. They have done their homework regarding town issues and they are angry. People don't keep pouring money into something if they feel it is not going where it should. They want someone who is willing to address the problems and do something besides slapping another override request on the ballot.
to anonymous - these parents will be voting for Mr Trimble who by his own admission will have little to do with the school system because they are angry at the leadership? The logic of this argument for Mr. Trimble escapes me.
Some have the impression that lacrosse is a game played at elite schools. I can assure you that if you were living around Baltimore, on Long Island or in Central NY, you would find everyone playing. The small town where I lived in Central NY was home to college All American and professional lacrosse players. Every year, they send kids to the finest schools to play lacrosse at a high level. The Guadagnolo brothers from J-E Jr-Sr High are playing at Syracuse now. The town did not even have a baseball field or Little League. As the Powell brothers from upstate say, Central NY is home to "hicks with sticks". Massachusetts is quickly catching up to those areas. Over 10,000 kids are playing lacrosse in the MBYLL and Max Quinzani, who played in our league, is playing at Duke and is third on the team in points.
In my engineering classes, sometimes a calculation would present a result that was clearly impossible. The procedure when that occurred was to check your assumptions. You feel my positions are schzoid. Perhaps you need to check your assumptions. I am quite sane. You have made an assumption that I do not want to have a quality education for Dartmouth children. Not so. I want the finest education that we can afford. I said in the taped interview that Dartmouth has never provided "the finest education" and I think that is demonstrably true. Many schools, public and private, have been able to provide a better education on average than ours. There are many reasons for that and spending is not a reliable indicator of results. That does not say that Dartmouth teachers are not excellent or that Dartmouth students are not able to receive an excellent education. What I said is that we have to provide "the best education that we can afford." You can view the interview here.
My own children did not receive the finest education available. I did not send them to private schools or elite universities. They attended public schools and public universities. I love my children and want the best for them, but I am also constrained by what I could afford. So is the town. I think we can have great schools without spending more than we can afford. I am not convinced that we have very different results from those a few short years ago. What exactly has changed in our school system since 2006? Same teachers, same curriculum, different building. Historically, Dartmouth has spent less and got better results than the state averages. Now we are told that we cannot achieve the same results that we have done throughout the years. I think you need to question those who are charged with running our school department why that is so.
You are wrong Bill. We do not have the same teachers just different building. We have some 34 less teachers than a few years ago. We also have lost the middle school curriculum director, the technology coordinator, an assistant principal at the middle school - all in the last few years. MCAS indicators are showing declines - ask Mrs Clark before she retires for the full run down. So while I respect that you are entitled to your opinion I do ask that you are accurate in your description of what has been lost in the schools and it goes well beyond simply closing 2 buildings.
One other point, you are correct in saying that Dartmouth historically has spent less (share that information with some of the CFRG folks - they have'nt believed anyone else on that issue) and they will continue to spend less than most communities on education even when the override questions are passed.
BillT, in all the school discussions I have heard and been a part of, nowhere have I heard people advocating that we want 'the finest education available'. People have been asking for an adequate system that treats all children equally, fairly and offers them something beyond the absolute minimum which you are stating is all we can afford. I disagree with you on the 'affordibility' of something a little more than bare minimum, but no one is asking for the Cadillac of educations. To say otherwise is more of the same red herring, 'straw man' arguments that the pro school people are always being acccused of making. No one is asking for the finest of anything but many are not satisfied with the bare mnimum either.
The state foundation budget establishes a minimum requirement for school spending for each school district in the Commonwealth. This foundation budget is not bare bones. From the Foundation Budget Review of 2001, we can find this description of the foundation budget,
"The funding provisions of the education reform law, codified in Chapter 70 of the General Laws, were intended to ensure that every public school system had adequate funding, regardless of the wealth of the local community, to provide a quality education to all its students."
and
"The calculation of the foundation budget is based on per pupil allowances for each of nineteen spending categories. These per pupil amounts are adjusted annually for a regional wage adjustment factor, inflation and then multiplied by the district’s current enrollment based on the October 1 Foundation Enrollment Report of the prior fiscal year. The Foundation Budget establishes spending targets by grade (pre-school, kindergarten, elementary, junior high and high school) and program (special education, bilingual, vocational and low income). Grade and program spending targets are intended to serve as guidelines only and are not binding on local school districts. The aggregate of the nineteen categories equals the foundation budget"
Many districts, included GNBVoke, spend only the minimum net school spending requirement. That does not mean minimum spending, it means the minimum requirement.
BillT, I do not believe I used the phrase 'bare bones' with its associate connotations. I said bare minimum, or as the state calls in Minimum Net School Spending. I do not believe we as a community should accept Minimum as an acceptable level for education in this day and age. Many, many other communities, in no better or worse shape than ours, spend above the minimum mandated by the state becasue they recognize the limitations of minimum spending on an item as important as education.
I also have yet to hear any documentatin that says this community simply cannot afford the cost of this override.
Do you at least cede the point that I made earlier that we do not have the same teachers only less buildings than before?
Interesting to read your post on lacrosse, Central New York and Long Island. We have 3 areas of commonality but are light years apart otherwise. I grew up on Long Island where I played HS lacrosse (badly) then went to Syracuse University where I watched lacrosse. Loved central New York.
Small world.
For the sake of argument I will concede that there are "some 34 less teachers than a few years ago" and the three management positions.I looked online for information to verify your number but could not find it. If you have an internet source, could you include the URL.
Now if you add up the cost of these positions (I'll use $50K for a salary) $50,000 times 34 teachers equals $1.7 million dollars. Add in the three administrators at $70K and we are up to $1.91 million. That's nearly the amount of the override request this year. Where was the money that was not used to employ 34 teachers spent? Don't say utilities increases because the entire budget for that is $679K, water, sewer, oil, electricity, gas and telephone.
34 teachers need 34 classrooms and at 20 children per class that would be 680 students. Where would these teachers teach and whom would they be teaching?
Your question asking for proof can also be turned around, can you provide any documentation that Dartmouth residents can afford increased taxes?
You have focused your response on spending which I submit os a poor predictor of results. Will you address why we could spend less than average in the past and get better than average results.
Ok BillT,
The number 34 less teachers was presented at one of the recent school forums presented I will try to get some 'official' corrobration and cite the source tomorrow. As some evidence that this number is accurate I offer the following link to a recent letter to the editor from an author who I believe is in a position to know:
http://www.southcoasttoday.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080320/OPINION/803200306/1003/TOWN02
That letter cites 35 teacher resignations in recent years-almost 10% of the faculty. The resignation percentage in previous years was around 1%.
The loss of the curriculum coordinator and technology director, along with the assistant principal position at the high school has been well documented and can be verified with a call to the Middle School principal, Mr. Cabral.
As far as space for those 'missing' teachers I point to the 23 empty classrooms that sit in buildings located on Dartmouth Street and Tucker Road. I also point to the average class size of 27 found at the Middle School, where language classes in the 7th grade have swelled to over 30 students. Dartmouth's student teacher ratio of 15.6:1 is unacceptably high and this was not always the case when the 'missing' teachers were present and accounted for.
As for cost for these positions, a large share of salaries have in fact been absorbed by increased utility costs, increased health care costs as well as wage increases. Additionally the state stopped sending transportation aid for schools in 2002 I believe leaving the communities to pick up the entire share, the well publicized spike in the vocational high school assessment has swallowed a great deal of money and the town has only in recent years begun to 'charge back' certain legitimate costs back to the schools when in previous, more flush, years these costs were not passed on to the schools.
So yes, the teaching positions have decreased dramatically as well as key administrative positions in recent years. Classroom space for those teachers has disappeared as well, class size at the Middle school has increased all around and funds have either been eliminated altogether or reduced while fees and charges to the schools have increased.
So, long story short - it is not the same school system less a few buildings as it was a few years back.
On the point of 'affordibility' the only hard evidence I can refer you to is data presented by Mr. Tom Davis when he argued to keep the single tier tax rate last Fall. He presented per capita income from various towns in Massachusetts that illustrated that Dartmouth per capita income was above average. I will get that data tomorrow as well and cite it. Beyond that, I simply look around at our community and see a vibrant community that shops liberally, eats out frequently, signs their kids up for all manner of costly sports and other activities,drives newish vehicles and for the most part keeps their properties neat and well maintained. I understand these observations do not account for every citizen in Dartmouth but they are an indicator of sorts to me. I also have to wonder just how many families will really go under with the weight of an override whose cost is for the most part considerably less than $1 a day. I just do not see it. What I have seen - not pointing at you BillT - is excuse making and finger pointing by many who would rather cast blame than shake loose another dollar a day for the benefit of the community. Just my 2 cents.
According to the state DOE website, the 1061 students at the Middle School have 71 teachers for a student-teacher ratio of 14.5 which is less than the district average of 15.6. Why would they have an average class size of nearly double the student-teacher ratio?
I agree that there are unused classrooms in the closed schools. Were the teachers laid off when the schools closed? I think they went to Quinn. So who should we hold accountable for the missing 34 teachers? The voters, me, you?
The hard evidence I can point is to the 2000 US census data which shows Dartmouth as having a lower median per capita income than Lakeville, Freetown, Acushnet, Rochester, Somerset, and Plymouth just to name a few. The link to the info is here. (Type in the town name to get the median per capita income.) We do beat Fall River and New Bedford.
The cost of student transportation is borne by the town and not part of the school budget. The school administers the contract and the town pays the bill. The state reimburses the town for a portion of the cost.See MGL here
No BillT the teachers from Cushman and Gidley by and large went to Quinn in to the previously unused wing of that building. The bulk of the lost teachers resigned for reasons that I suppose only they know.
Ask Mr Cabral for the Middle School average class size and he will tell you 27. Ask about the language arts classes and he will tell you they are 30 with one class upwards of 34-too large to be held in a classroom.
I do know how transporation costs are paid for. The fact of the matter is pre-2002 the state kicked in money to the town side to offset transportation costs. It had been getting less and less over the years but even the relatively small amount helped. In those days the town did not agressively seek to recoup 'charge back'monies from the schools, in part becasue they were getting some help from the state. As that money dried up the town had no choice but to look at how much they could legitamately charge back the schools. If I am not mistaken since the early 2000's the towns 'charge backs' went from diminimous amounts to over $2,000,000 for the upcoming fiscal year.
The surrounding town's you cite may well have higher income levels but I'm not mistaken they also generally have higher tax rates even after approval of all override questions. These numbers are from a 2 year old tabulation on the DOR web site - couldnt find newer data but all the towns you cite have a significantly higher rate than Dartmouth whihc was $6.77/$1,000 atthe time the table was compiled: Fairhaven $7.92/$1,000,Lakeville 8.35/$1,000, Swansea $7.86, Plymouth $9.88/,Somerset $10.28/, Rochester $8.96/$1,000. So those town may earn more, but they also pay a lot more too.
anonymous, The tax rate is figured backwards from the levy! So, you can't really tell anything by the tax rate. Example look at Nantucket Island. The homes are worth millions but the tax rate is low.
I understand that too ndmom. Its one indication of relative wealth vs taxes but not the only one and yes it cuts both ways. Many Lakeville and Plymouth homes are valued higher than Dartmouth homes too so they do pay more out of pocket than we do for a given house as they should since they have on the whle a higher per capita income.
My point is by most measures we are not a poor community and I am not convinced an additio of less than $1/day to approve every single question will break us.
Post a Comment