Fitton Center studio named
Sneak peek at 'Runway' finale
'Suor Angelica' rehearsal
Home > Blogs > Springfield Schools News and Issues > Archives > 2009 > January > 12 > Entry
What are the impacts of closing Clark Middle School?
In today’s paper I outlined the potential impacts of Springfield City School’s plan to close Clark Middle School.
The district is holding a forum this Wednesday (6 p.m. at Clark Middle School) to gather public input.
The conversation to close Clark is pretty much completely financially driven, with officials looking to cut about $1.4 to $1.9 million from the budget next year.
I’m posting the glancebox that ran on C2 of today’s paper - the nitty-gritty details of all the changes under consideration - after the jump for anyone who didn’t see it.
Are you concerned with anything in the plan or do you think it’s a good idea?
Public meeting
A public meeting 6 p.m. Wednesday, Jan. 14, at Clark Middle School will discuss Springfield schools’ proposal to close Clark Middle School.
• Clark would close as a middle school.
• Administrative departments will move out of South High School. Some central office departments will move to Clark, with special education departments moving to Keifer Alternative Center and business departments moving to the service center on East Home Road.
• The bus depot will move from South High School to the Clark Middle School site.
For the 2009-10 school year, will your child be in:
Preschool program at a Springfield City Schools building?
• Prekindergarten programs of all types will be moved to Clark Middle School to create a preschool center.
• Head Start programs at Fulton and Kenwood elementary schools will move to the Clark Preschool Center.
• Preschool special education units at Snyder Park, Kenwood, Perrin Woods, Lincoln, Horace Mann, Snowhill and Simon Kenton elementary schools to Clark Middle School.
Elementary school?
• Approximately 30 students who attend Lagonda Elementary school under the voluntary transfer program will return to their home schools.
• Attendance lines will be redrawn at Lagonda Elementary school, affecting about 80 students.
• Move the Lagonda Elementary south boundary line that currently runs along Lagonda Avenue north to McCreight Avenue then create an imaginary southern boundary line extending diagonally south to U.S. 40 East. Those students will attend Warder-Park/Wayne.
• Re-assign students living on Second Street and north to Kenton Elementary.
• Re-assign students living on North Limestone Street north to Harding Road to Kenton Elementary.
Sixth grade?
• Sixth-grade students would remain at their elementary schools.
• Sixth-grade students at Lagonda could be affected by the boundary changes.
Seventh and eighth grade?
• Seventh- and eighth-graders would attend the middle schools.
• Seventh- and eighth-grade students who would have attended Clark Middle School will attend another middle school based on two attendance areas:
• Students south of High Street will attend Hayward Middle School.
• Students living on and north of High Street will attend Roosevelt Middle School.
Gifted Students?
• Gifted students will move out of Snowhill Elementary School to make room for sixth-grade classrooms.
• The relocation for the gifted program is undetermined, Clark Middle School is one possibility.
Permalink | Comments (14) | Post your comment | Categories: Springfield City Schools
Comments
By Donald Hatfield
January 12, 2009 1:17 PM | Link to this
Closing schools is not the answer to this problem. Changing the way the schools are funded,that is the answer. The school board should know by now that real estate tax dollars are not enough. Why not tax everybody and make everyone responsible for supporting our schools. Simply stop the tax on realestate, and start a new one on food. Every body eats so everybody pays.By Clark Co Resident
January 12, 2009 9:50 PM | Link to this
Open enrollment and voucher systems have allowed urban public schools to deteriorate all over the country as well as in Clark County. In Springfield’s west side, housing was torn down to build a new hospital. The neighborhood used to be a nice working class area. Now it is full of apartment rentals where people come and go at random. Unfortunately, we can’t stop people from moving out of the area. Ultimately, putting students at the north end of town won’t change their test scores. Overcrowded classrooms just cause more problems.By Rachel
January 12, 2009 10:55 PM | Link to this
Closing Clark is not the answer. The district could move the board office to Clark, move the busing to Clark, and redraw boundary lines for Lagonda. Leave the sixth graders at the middle schools, leave pre-k at the elementary schools, and leave Clark open. It will cost more to close Clark and make all those other changes. Clark is big enough to house the board offices and still operate as a middle school. Our schools are over-crowded and our teachers are worked to their limits trying to make sure our “future” is at or above standards. It is already difficult to make sure our children have a proper education without the district cramming them all together. The district would not have to spend money to bus the misplaced middle school students to their “new” school, spend money to upgrade Clark to meet Head Start guidelines, and spend money to accommodate the other students that are moved around in the elementary. I thought the district was wanting to save money. This plan will only cost more and the students suffer the most with poor educational environments. Not to mention, properties on the west end will lower in value without a school close by. We want people to come to Springfield not move away. How is this helping?By annoyed resident
January 13, 2009 1:28 AM | Link to this
this is so stupid! it would cause too much havoc. i see no sense in this. it shouldn’t be dealt this way but by the way the schools are funded. ever since they got the brilliant idea to re-build all of the schools, things have been complicated. i understand that the majority of them needed upgraded or fixed a little but i dont know. it has just caused too much of a wreck and i honestly dont think things will balance out for a long time from now.By Mamajudy
January 14, 2009 1:14 AM | Link to this
Whatever happened to the premise that kids needed stability in their lives? Is this how we help stabilize them by moving them to different schools every time we turn around? If as parents we moved our kids around as much as the school system does, we would have children services at our front door wanting to know when we were going to settle down!! What about the families with kids in pre-k and head start who will now have to manage to pick those kids up at clark and then run all the way across town to get the other kids at their school? Find another way to save money—this just puts more work on the same amount of teachers and does nothing to improve our schools. This is why so many families are moving away from the city just so the kids can go to a better school system.By Travis Aker
January 14, 2009 4:13 PM | Link to this
You can’t tax food its bad enough that were paying taxes on everything else, that is one of the basic needs. What we need is a income tax across the board to help pay for the schools, and to make the schools are getting the money and be responsible for the way they are spending it on things they need to improve the education instead of unwanted things.By Travis Aker
January 14, 2009 4:17 PM | Link to this
Besides our tax dollars would be wasted if they did close Clark Middle SchoolBy john
January 15, 2009 8:10 AM | Link to this
Closing one middle school in one school district is a small symptom of a greater illness. A commentor correctly noted that it’s all about economics - if you can’t afford what you have, you have to give it up. As for those who want increased taxes or a different method of funding schools, consider this analogy. If a home owner can’t afford the payments on their house, they move into something they CAN AFFORD or increase their earnings in order to afford what they have. Springfield, sadly, is not a growth area, so increasing tax revenues locally isn’t going to happen swiftly (if at all). Deriving a different method to fund schools (paid for by OTHER local or state generated tax funds) only feeds the beast and does not solve the fundamental problem with the American education system. The reason the Governor hasn’t changed the funding formula is that he can’t - there’s no better way and there’s no money, in spite of what the courts say. So folks, man up, shoulder the problem at hand and solve those issues within your control. What are these? Send kids to school who respect themselves, their school, their teachers and the wonderful benefit that they are getting for free. Parents - support your educators by being parents and not you child’s friend! Teachers - thank you for what you bring to the classroom every day, but more is needed. Administrators - demand that your buidings serve as much more than a babysitting facility that most taxpayers think they are. Activists - Stop looking at single variables (i.e., more tax revenues or a different source of tax revenues) and think about ALL variables in the education equation. Finally, crunch time hasn’t arrived yet, or at least most don’t realize it. Contemplating the closing of a single middle school, isn’t crunch time, but it’s a bell ringer.By null
January 15, 2009 8:14 AM | Link to this
Why over crowd the elementary schools or middle schools. Just leave clark open.Some parents may only have enough time to pick up childern at clark drop them off at home and go to work. They need to think of the everyday person, besides did they not have a building of thier own, I do not recall any problems like this when I was in schoolBy Barb
January 15, 2009 9:40 AM | Link to this
Here we go again. We had to have all these new schools and now it’s okay to restructure one and house office, again at the taxpayers expense. Sorry I voted to build the new schools. It seems like this district is never happy.By Mom of a preschooler
January 15, 2009 10:51 AM | Link to this
I am a mom of a special needs preschooler that they are talkig of relocating. I just don’t see how this will work easily and inexpensively. My child is in a wheelchair and the building does not have an elevator, or bathrooms in the classrooms and they don’t want to give the preschool program enough classrooms to meet all the needs that are currently being met at the different schools. I definately understand the needs to save money, but I can’t see how making kids move is the answer. Unfortunately, I don’t know the answer. All I know is it is hard for a typically developing child to adjust to all these changes, now lets move all the special ed kids into one school. Didn’t the government work for years to get special ed kids back into public schools. This seems like a step backwards.By Tax Collector
January 15, 2009 2:14 PM | Link to this
I agree that the schools are under funded…but trying to tax everyone who may do business in an area as a means to collect revenue for the schools is insane. Why should someone who may come to Springfield to shop or eat have to pay taxes to support Spfld’s schools. Supporting the school system is something that the residents of the community need to pay for. What should really be asked is why is the current funding method not working in Springfield, but seems to work in other communities? What is different about Spfld?By ash
January 15, 2009 3:56 PM | Link to this
I personally think that building all of the new schools was a stupid idea and tearing all of them down was even more stupid. Not all of the shools were bad enough to need rebuilt. Look at Simon Kenton, it was good enough for Snow Hill kids to attend while there new building was being built. That would have been a good place to put these offices or even to keep Simon Kenton. Some of the schools were bad, not all of them and now the school district is in debt. Closing a school isn’t a solution to save money, they are just going to keep closing them and that means that building them was waste of taxpayer money. Spfld school district will never be satisfied.By Springbilly
January 15, 2009 4:36 PM | Link to this
Springfield needed new schools…however I would queston why the board and administration did not consider consolidating some of the middle schools at that time…maybe the number of new schools built was not needed based on consolidating some of the middle schools (much like the HS). It is decisions like this…which clearly had little thought back when it could have saved a lot of taxpayor dollars that make the community upset and wonder what kind of incompetent people are running the district. What type of long term planning is actually being done?