Your Mission: Grow the Grand Rapids Metro Area

[suydam]

So, is the current school system the biggest impediment to growth for the entire region?

No way.

The city has problems (what city doesn't?) and the school system is a big one. Big Bob's right about unions controlling hiring and firing. That single fact is what turns a lot fo people against the teacher's unions.

To stop back and address your question in a different light:

The way to grow the region is to figure out what "smart" growth means to us as GR-area citizens. To me, that means starting at the middle. I'm not interested in 4,000 more homes and strip malls in Caledonia and Hudsonville, etc. To grow the region intelligently so that it's a great place for the next 50 years worth of job-seekers and relocating families, you need a healthy core, planned growth that addresses all cities in the area as a single cohesive metropolitan area.

Unfortunately I don't see any of the local communities saying "sure, we'll relegate ourselves to Agricultural Zoning while you guys get gobs of PUDs and the requisite tax dollars."

[worstj]

Buy the morton house and rivive its former glory. Then build the Lyon and Ottawa Tower. And finally, give great tax incentives for relocating to downton GR.

[Mark Miller]

This is an interesting topic in that it once again brings GRPS into the debate. Is GRPS the biggest impediment? I don't know, but it is an impediment.

For sustained growth to occur in the urban core, there needs to be rooftops. These rooftops need to have a certain household income level. When there is a large population with a certain household income, business will come, particularly retail.

So if the schools were better, would more middle class move to the city? In my opinion, most likely.

I still agree with what bigbobpizza says. We need competition. Vouchers at the minimum will provide more options for people with limited means in deciding on a school and may put more pressure on the GRPS to begin to improve perceptions. Dick Devos has spent millions on promoting vouchers, now in his campaign, he is taking the politician's way out and not addressing this issue. If he came out for vouchers, I may actually vote for him.

The school issue is HUGE. It is the topic of discussion of almost every family we meet residing in the city. "Where are you sending your kids, and why?" The system is probably not as broken as it appears, but few people want to risk testing it out on their children.

We have three kids in the city and still have not yet decided on where to send our kindergarten aged child this fall. It is about a month away!! Do we take the chance on GRPS Montessori or take the charter school route? Both have pros and cons.

For the record, I think Bernard Taylor and the GRPS is moving in the right direction.

And funding, in my opinion, is not an issue. GRPS is spending something like $2 million a week on new construction. Throwing more money at these issues is not the solution. I recently heard on some radio program that education spending has steadily risen in this country since the Reagan adminstration, with diminishing returns, across the board, in both "good" suburban districts and distressed urban districts.

It is time to stop worrying about standardized test scores and using the current model of all education levels, that of credentialing students (including at the university) and to start educating kids. At this we, as a nation, are failing.

[twoshort]

If a child with a very good home life and very involved parents goes to GRPS, is he or she going to get a poor education?

[Mark Miller]

If a child with a very good home life and very involved parents goes to GRPS, is he or she going to get a poor education?

That is the million dollar question in our household. And we do not have an answer.

[twoshort]

That is the million dollar question in our household. And we do not have an answer.

Just making sure I wasn't the only one.

I know Dave's kids went to GRPS and he's about as involved as you can be. Sounds like they turned out pretty damn good... some might say better than if they had attended a suburban school.

[AlexPKeaton]

Unfortunately I don't see any of the local communities saying "sure, we'll relegate ourselves to Agricultural Zoning while you guys get gobs of PUDs and the requisite tax dollars."

That's why I'd like Grand Rapids' city limits to extend well beyond the urbanized area. I'd like the city to control the urban fringes so that there aren't the competing interests of many local governments to worry about. Unless you can convince a ton of stupid townships to not grow and instead direct development to the city, a cohesive meto government would probably be more effective at limiting sprawl.

-nb

[ericnmu]

Taking money away from public school is the solution? I hardly think so.

Heres a National Assesment of Education Progress report comparing Charter vs Public school standard test scores

You may have seen this 20/20 episode, but it answers a lot of questions about our schools.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=pfRUMmTs0ZA

Either way, its a good watch. I didnt do much research behind it, so it could very well be corporate/political biased, but I took it for what its worth. It presented some interesting facts.

[snoogit]

You may have seen this 20/20 episode, but it answers a lot of questions about our schools.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=pfRUMmTs0ZA

Either way, its a good watch. I didnt do much research behind it, so it could very well be corporate/political biased, but I took it for what its worth. It presented some interesting facts.

Obviously with a program entitled "Stupid in America" it is going to have a certain bias to it.

what this report fails to report is the Parent factor and "hoooooooo boy" parents don't want to hear that

[ericnmu]

obviouslt with a program entiteled "stupid in america" its going to be biased oin some respect

lol, hence the disclaimer

[snoogit]

lol, hence the disclaimer

oh sure quote before I fix my errors

[Rizzo]

No amount of money, no amount of competition, and certainly no amount of charter schools will make up for the lack of parental influence. The reason why this community has hit the fan is because moms and dads want to play the friendship game. Parents need to start being like my parents -- not caring if their kids liked them or not.

I don't care how much money the state gives us, or if Big Dick proposes that charter schools or schools of choice is the answer. This crap about alternative education won't matter if the number one reason for the GRPS problem is lack of parental involvement. You think parents that let their kids skip school for the sake of being their friend is going to care which system or school they attend? Hell no.

[GRDadof3]

Interestingingly, Grand Rapids-Muskegon-Holland MSA (back when it was classified that way) was ranked #5 by Expansion Management Magazine for its Quality of Public Schools in 2004, for districts with between 40K - 100K students:

http://www.expansionmanagement.com/smo/art...=16222&st=2

(about 2/3's of the way down)

As well as notable placing on a number of other Expansion Management rankings:

THIS Knowledge Competitive Index ranking still puzzles me.

4 Star Quality of Life Metros in 2006

#36 For European Expansions in 2004

[Mark Miller]

No amount of money, no amount of competition, and certainly no amount of charter schools will make up for the lack of parental influence. The reason why this community has hit the fan is because moms and dads want to play the friendship game. Parents need to start being like my parents -- not caring if their kids liked them or not.

I don't care how much money the state gives us, or if Big Dick proposes that charter schools or schools of choice is the answer. This crap about alternative education won't matter if the number one reason for the GRPS problem is lack of parental involvement. You think parents that let their kids skip school for the sake of being their friend is going to care which system or school they attend? Hell no.

That is exactly the point. The parent factor is the biggest factor...but

I have no doubt that both my wife and myself will have positive impact on our kids education. We will be involved and there will be stability in the household. The problem for us, and probably for many others in our position, is not what is happening while they are in the household, but rather what is happening the six hours during the day that they are in the school.

The GRPS is full of students that have little parental involvement and little, if any, discipline. When these kids are in the same classroom, as my well behaved daughter, who happens to listen and follow directions, who do you think is going to suffer? She will, because all of the teacher's time will be spent dealing with the problem kids. Not to mention that whatever teaching that is going on will be taught at the lowest common denomimator, so again my daughter will suffer the consequences and not get the very education that the public system should be providing and clearly is not.

Does the charter school do any better? That is anybody's guess. Who wants to roll the dice?

Whether these statements are true or not is irrelevant if that is the perception of the 800 kids that will NOT be attending the GRPS this year.

And simply blaming the lack of parental involvement on some socio-economic collapse just does not cut it. This is America, one of the wealthiest nations on earth and we can not educate our kids!?

I have had these discussions over and over. It ends in frustration every time.

As this relates to the original thread is obvious. For this city to continue to prosper, grow, draw business development and be able to sustain itself, it needs to attract and retain the middle class families. Empty nesters buying $500,000 condos downtown is great. Single generation X and the millenials living downtown is awesome, D.I.N.K.s buying up the houses in Heritage Hill is wonderful.

But without the middle class families, the very backbone of this country, the city will not reach its full potential. The biggest reason they are not coming is most likely the schools.

[GaryP]

That is exactly the point. The parent factor is the biggest factor...but

I have no doubt that both my wife and myself will have positive impact on our kids education. We will be involved and there will be stability in the household. The problem for us, and probably for many others in our position, is not what is happening while they are in the household, but rather what is happening the six hours during the day that they are in the school.

The GRPS is full of students that have little parental involvement and little, if any, discipline. When these kids are in the same classroom, as my well behaved daughter, who happens to listen and follow directions, who do you think is going to suffer? She will, because all of the teacher's time will be spent dealing with the problem kids. Not to mention that whatever teaching that is going on will be taught at the lowest common denomimator, so again my daughter will suffer the consequences and not get the very education that the public system should be providing and clearly is not.

How do you think vouchers solve this problem, other than by seperating children with good parents from children with bad parents?

[snoogit]

How do you think vouchers solve this problem, other than by seperating children with good parents from children with bad parents?

Vouchers don't solve that problem bad parents are all over the economic spectrum. Those who get vouchers aren't guaranteed to be good parents either. I would say those who apply for vouchers might actually be bad parents who think a "better school" might make their kid better, when it wouldn't.

I agree with that one video in that it needs to be easier to trim off the bottom 10%. But there are so many other factors, most of a child's social problems begin and end in the home. And that video showcased more of the social problems then the teacher's problems. This all starts at the petty bickering we all do over various trivial issues.

Parents who cant come to grips with the fact their child just isnt that "gifted genius" they keep wanting to believe, and will defend their kid even as he/she sits there looking like a complete brat. I don't hate kids, I just hate what they've become.

[Rizzo]

Principal Tom McNally said the event was intended to invite people to a Sept. 7 open house and make sure they were aware of the programs in the new school.

He said one parent was so excited after talking at length with him and school board member Harry Campbell that she decided to transfer her children from an area charter school.

-- http://www.mlive.com/news/grpress/index.ss....xml&coll=6

[DwntwnGeo]

This is America, one of the wealthiest nations on earth and we can not educate our kids!?

And as someone pointed out in an earlier post. We (the United States) have continually given more money to schools for the past twenty years when Regan was in office. And we still have problems.... IMO this supports that thowing money at something won't fix the underlying problem.

One thing that people and parents have to understand is that not eveyone will be what we want or expect them to be. Not every child will be good in school or want to go to school. In some cases examples of what our parents do and act plays an important part of things.

[Mark Miller]

How do you think vouchers solve this problem, other than by seperating children with good parents from children with bad parents?

Over the course of many years our legislators have made many attempts and created many mechanisms to try to solve the problems of urban school districts.

School of choice has been one of them, but while school of choice is a good mechanism it has, relatively speaking, failed in Grand Rapids. The best districts have all but closed the door. Forest Hills has suspended letting in "those kids" and EGR gets over 100 applications for under 30 spaces in their kindergarten.

Certainly pumping money into a district is not the answer. So we have tried all of these mechanisms and they do not work, or do not go far enough to solve the problems.

We have not tried vouchers.

What parents want is the opportunity to select a good school for their children. This choice adds value to the city.

I am not sure what you mean by separating children with "good" parents from those with "bad" parents ( I would prefer involved vs. non-involved). From my perspective, I think that the separation has already occurred and continues to occur right now. People with means and people who are involved are avoiding the GRPS, not all of them, but a disproportionate number of them. Vouchers certainly can not make the divide more severe, can they? It would appear that it is already a separation of epic proportions.

Vouchers could allow someone more choices than they currently have and that is key.

Vouchers will put the power of money in the hands of parents and the schools wanting this money will have to attract and keep the interest of the children and parents. There will be competition.

The schools will need to convince parents that they will teach their children, if they can not convince, then the dollars will go elsewhere.

I am not sure how this would work, but my guess is that the vouchers could be utilized by parents to off-set the tuition costs in private schools, like St. Andrews, which will also aid in helping these schools sagging attendance numbers.

What it boils down to is that even though there are choices, these choices are limited and there are no clear cut front runners. What it boils down to for our family is that a private school is not financially possible. It would be more financially feasible to move to EGR and pay the higher taxes than it would be to go to St. Andrews.

And that is why the middle class is under-reperesented in this city.