mackie Anonymous

I don't live in Lancaster but am wondering why no one is doing this for Hina-jo in Dallas. Thanks for the information. Sounds like a good idea. I just submitted my complaint to the TEA for Dallas.

1 month, 1 week ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

remoned Anonymous

Just returned from the LISD board meeting last night, and Dr. Lewis has indeed been suspended. The seating at the meeting was very packed with hardly a room to sit in, half filled with concerned citizens and the othe half consisting of LISD teachers and admin.

First a few facts, as I am awaiting the detailed reasons behind the suspension, as I left before they broached the evaluation, due to the fact the Board pres, moved the agenda to the last item of the night from it's original placement on the agenda. But first let's clear up a few of the misnomers that continue to plague the city of Lancaster and it's school district:

1) In the 5 years Dr. Lewis has been here, not only have test scores risen each year, but this year every school in the district with the exception of the high school passed every area of the TAKS test. These stats according to the latest Dallas Morning news releases. And the h.s. missed out on passing by 5% points, in one of the four required subjects. That's hardly what one would consider "failing test scores". But if you continue to tell a lie enough times, folk will obviously start to believe it.

2). The budget as scheduled, the budget will fall short $1.5 million dollars, and not the $4 milion dollars stated to the newspapers by the board president, who claims she has no knowledge of the newspapers statements, attributed to her. And the reasons for the shortcoming is due to LISD falling short of it's statewide projections of '08 attendance, based on the previous years growth of 500 kids per year. Hence in falling short 213 children under the projected number, the district will be CHARGED $1.8 million for those empty seats anyway. As a result a plan was presented in conjunction with conversations and actions taken between the superintendant, the staff and the principles of the district to devise away to remedy budget concerns without anyone having to lose their job, and without having to cut anyone's existing salry. And the result was several persons involved giving up various bonuses and incentive laced programs in their packages to maintain every employee in the district to stay as is. Wonderful news, right? Well the board president requested not to vote on the passing of the revised budget, until she could scrutinize the budget at a later date.

3). The board president also feigned fake interest in the concern of the districts budget, yet made no mention of the fact that one of the reasons the budget is as tight as it is, is due to excess spending of tax payers dollars from the general fund of the budget, going towards fees for the law firm she hired to investigate the superintendant, as well as the state conservator which, according to the TEA president in the newspapers months back, she requested herself. Another fact which she denys.

4) The lie that our school district is the lowest in the region is another urban myth that needs to be laid to rest. As alluded to earlier LISD has all but one school district pass all areas of the TAKS, by comparison Desoto ISD failed 3 schools. You do the math.

So now, at least temporarily, Dr. Lewis is out. No doubt Dr. Lewis naysayers all over are rejoicing. But if you think things up til this point have been bad, they're about to get alot worse.

Dr. Lewis will no doubt appeal the suspension, if not outright file suit for wrongful termination, which if they're insisting that they have a leg to stand on because of his performance, then as you can see, the recorded evidence, not the lies and heresy, clearly show that LISD has improved by leaps and bounds since his arrival in 2003. In which case, he should.

Not to mention LISD has passed every audit as well as every year end financial report scoring a mark of above average to superior, again, since he's been in office. That should dispell all of the "Stealing money, mismanagement of funds" talk. But again, people believe what lies are leaked/told to the press.

And in addition to that, the board president herself may soon be out of a job, if not facing legal actions, for ethics violations and actions unbecoming of a board member.

Here's to hoping the new superintendent can be allowed to come in and do their job without the board president meddling and micro managing, as she did with Dr. lewis, which according to board rules is supposedly against the law... and finally get this community behind his/her efforts. But if the last relationship between the super and the board pres. is any indication, if said person doesn't come in and cater to the beck and whim of the board pres., there's going to be hell to pay.

Again, I emplore any one interested to come sit in on the board meetings and see what's really going on for yourselves. And stop beleiving the blatant lies being released to the press. In an obvious attempt to run a smear campaign against the then sitting superintendant, Dr. Lewis.

Folk should write to the TEA alright, but write about something with which you have the facts to back them up.

I for one, am writing and complaining about the incompetency not to mention the numerous lies that the board president is caught telling at every meeting attended. To which she feigns ignorance or simply states, that she forgot. Not to mention the voting record of not having voted yes in 51 tries since 2006, when it came to the implementation of programs and suggestions designed to better the educational quality of the children in this district, on whose board she now helms.

There are alot of things wrong with the LISD district.... Dr. Lewis is and was not one of them.

1 month, 1 week ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

interestedcitizen Anonymous

First of all, I'm posting some links so that anyone who wants to see some raw data and respond to Remone can see that what I am about to say is true and not a lie.

http://www.tea.state.tx.us/perfreport...

http://professionals.collegeboard.com...

I do not dispute that TAKS scores are rising in Lancaster in some areas and falling in others, but what does that mean? Certainly falling scores mean the kids are not measuring up to previous year's standards, but do rising scores indicate the children are learning more? Lewis says the TAKS is a moving target. How do we know TAKS is becoming more challenging every year? What we really need to know is how we are doing against other districts. Are we gaining on them or are they pulling away from us?

In Lewis' presentations, he only deals with what is happening internally. He doesn't measure how our performance compares regionally or statewide.

TAKS only measures minimum skills. To pass TAKS is not to prove superior academic aptitude.

A better measure of academic excellence is SAT scores. That test measures mastery of Algebra II and tests reasoning and analytical skill. A good vocabulary and a knowledge of English is necessary to do well on the SAT.

We were at 808 when Lewis arrived. A year after he arrived, we dipped to 802. Then we rebounded to 809. The year we rebounded to 809, the state gained a point on us. We're 182 points lower than the state SAT average and 212 lower than the national average. In 1993, we were within 3 points of the state average.

I keep hearing Lewis supporters accuse others about lies. What lies? Identify a specific lie. Better still, identify the person who published the lie. It could well be that Lewis is the one who sets up these straw men who are allegedly telling lies. It could well be that the false statements that he attributes to others are merely false statements of a straw man that he has built up. He then associates all of his detractors with his straw men and then, with his charts that do not tell the whole story, he proceeds to put down the straw men he has built up. He then uses the propaganda technique of "guilt by association" and attempts to destroy the credibility of any person who sounds like one of the straw men he has erected.

As for the $1.5 million, that is only the revenues we lost because we were 203 kids short of projections. That doesn't cover additonal liabilities left over from 07-08, such as lower revenues from the state because we overestimated our average daily attendance last year, leading to further reductions in state revenue as the state recoups the money we owe it at "settle-up."

Lewis is a master of spin. He mines the nuggets of favorable information and carefully excludes contrary data. What he says is mostly true, but it is deceptive because it omits critical facts.

He understands psychology and the power of the bully pulpit. He understands the propaganda technique of "ad hominem."

Obviously, he has captured the mind of Ramone. Ramone has lost his ability to be a critical thinker and look beyond the slick presentations to find the whole truth.

1 month ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

gregstephenson Anonymous

Only one person can drink as much Lewis koolaid as Ramone and that is Lewis himself. I guess that is why he left the meeting early, he was escorted by district police.

1 month ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

jefmelch Anonymous

TEA publishes the official staffing report from LISD to the agency for the prior fiscal year. It is, of course and as always with LISD reports to TEA , totally bogus. But it’s the best we have.

http://www.tea.state.tx.us/cgi/sas/br...

The totally-screwed-up’ed-ness of the report begins with report that the middle school only has ten teachers. It’s screwed up by double counting sixth grade. Etc.

But according to the official report LISD employed, last year, no less than 3 deputy superintendents. For 8 campuses LISD paid 9 principals and 16 assistant principals

The district had 404 teachers, averaging an annual pay of about $45,000.

The teachers were supported by 44 aides, each drawing about $20,000.

And LISD had 180 “Full Time Equivalents”, “auxiliary employees” These are apparently substitute teachers. The 180 auxiliary employees might represent 360 people each of whom work a half day. Or some other fractional day times multiple employee. Whoever they are and however many, these folks earn at a pay rate that works out to $21,000 per year.

So the total payroll cost of teachers, aides and subs is about $23 Million.

LISD reported 94 support staff, averaging $53,000 annually, with payroll cost of support totaling about $5 million.

They had 42 administrators, averaging $75,000 annually, with cost of administration totaling about $3 million.

Enrollment last year was reported to be 6243. (This is distinct from Average Attendence of about 5700) Then the student teacher ratio works out to be 15.4 The student to staff ratio works out to be 46. Both these figures will be SMALLER given that only a fraction of the enrolled students show up in class on any given day.

Suppose LISD's student-to-staff ratio increased by one, to 47. This would reduce support and admin staff by about 4. At about $60,000 each that would reduce costs by $239,000

Suppose the district increased student- teacher ratios by about 1 to 16.4 The reduction in teaching force would be 24 , at $45,000 that would reduce payroll by about $1,000,000.

In fact, according to both Jim Damm and Larry Lewis, the conservator instructed the superintendent to prepare a roster of employees in preparation for possible staff reductions. Then, according to both, the superintendent refused to provide the list he'd developed and attempted his hastily improvised "pay raise roll back" plan instead. (This impulsive fly-by-the-seat-of-the-pants management style is characteristic. Fans of Dr Lewis will remember how 3 hours of "Googling the heck out of it" established the genius of the Four Day Week and how the Questia online reference software went from sales pitch to full implementation in less than 3 days. )

For some reason the board has not been able to get organization charts, payroll rosters, job descriptions etc from the superintendent. Now the conservator is having comparable problems. One wonders if the whole pay rollback is an attempt to avoid a probe into just who is assigned to what jobs at what pay...

1 month ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

jefmelch Anonymous

"The continous web of lies, the deceit, the obvious smear campaign being ran in the media outlets such as the local papers... claiming Dr Lewis is stealing money, and the district is in such financial woes that their going bankrupt, and credit cards are being abused, etc. All of which have turned out to be false claims. Imagine that. "

You image allegations easier to refute than the truth. The technique on display is "the strawman". You distort the report, confuse the news, and blame the claim. How about imagining nothing and dealing with facts?

To the absolute best of my knowledge there has NEVER been any allegation, published or rumored, that Dr Lewis steals. What has been alleged is that he hired an unqualified crony from out-of-state who (1) had never worked with Texas school financial accounting systems (2) who had never worked with Dr Lewis's newly purchased "Penatmation" software used by the Lancaster ISD to safeguard school finances (3) who (Dr Lewis later confessed to Trustees) utterly failed to post million dollar transactions (including loans and intra-district fund exchanges) to the software or the old fashioned paper-and-ink general financial ledger and (4) who, after his abrupt and unexplained departure, was arrested and convicted of embezzlement from his previous school employer. Recap: Dr Lewis paid a six figure salary to his old buddy from Maryland to safeguard our kids' money; and his friend turned out to be incompetent and dishonest. What part of this summary do you dispute?

To the absolute best of my knowledge there has NEVER been any allegation that the district is going bankrupt -- has or will default on its debts. What has been alleged is that (1) Dr Lewis has taken on more short-term debt each year of his administration; (2) that his chosen financial accounting systems (see above) did not disclose to the public and trustees the scope and consequences of that increasing debt; (3) he has repeatedly proposed increasing LONG term debt (thirty-year "construction" bonds) far beyond the ability of the taxpayers to repay and (4) used such long-term debt for procurement of consumable or short-life assets (for example computers, vehicles, cleaning supplies and choir robes.) The interest payments on such debt and rapid depreciation of such assets does significantly weaken the district's financial health (short of bankruptcy) in much the same way kidney disease and necessary dialysis treatments impair an invidual's physical health (short of death). What aspect of the actual allegation -- rather than your strawman -- is in dispute?

To the absolute best of my knowledge there has NEVER been any allegation that the district's TAKS scores are falling. What has been alleged is that (1) TAKS scores remain significantly below the average measured across the state and region, showing a "performance gap", and (2) in general where scores have risen, the state average has ALSO risen by a comparable amount -- indicating easier tests and "grade inflation" more than instructional improvements and (3) in the few cases where district's scores have risen at a faster rate than the state's, such as in 3rd grade reading, the results remain below average -- "Lake Woebegone" in reverse. All the scores are below average. Note, also, that NONE of the allegation is directed at the STUDENTS. The kids in Lancaster are good, normal, typical, average kids and are perfectly capable of acheiving normal, typical, average results -- given good (or even average) schools with good (or even typical) leadership. The allegation is that Dr Lewis has, evidently, NOT provided such schools and leadership. What aspect of this do you dispute?

Now, in all fairness, you are correct regarding allegations that Dr Lewis is profligate with the district's credit card. I myself have heard, and repeated, such claims. The auditors from TEA sampled several (but did NOT review every) large transactions and found worrisome evidence that many charges reflected no reasonable district or educational purpose. TEA provided examples including (1) Dr Lewis taking his buddies out for lunch; (2) buying favored staffers, students and vendors dinner; and (3) charging meals to the card after taking a cash "meal money" advance for the same trip. In his response to the TEA Dr Lewis chose not to dispute the facts; but to argue instead that his contract permitted him the discretion for such use -- or abuse -- of the card. Perhaps he is correct. But given the investigation and response regarding credit card usage; facts to which the Superintedent has already stipulated -- what do you find to dispute?

With regard to TAKS results, can you tell me what of the following table of data you find contradicted by AEIS reports from TEA? <pre> Sum of Reading 3rd Year
District 2005 2006 2007 2008

Car-FarmBrch 91 89 90 87

Cedar Hill 90 86 87 89

Coppell 99 99 99 98

Dallas 76 80 77 77

DeSoto 85 86 83 84

Duncanville 94 96 94 94

Garland 92 91 91 92

Grd Praie 86 88 86 84

Hiland Park 100 100 100 100

Irving 91 84 81 84

Lancaster 74 75 82 76

Mesquite 93 87 87 85

Richardson 87 87 89 89

</pre>

Elementary (3rd) Reading, the very most heroic effort made, with the most expensive curriculum (Voyager) sold, resulted in peak performance last year and suffered back sliding this year. At the district's peak, with 82% of students passing, every other Dallas County district tested had better scores.

I'll tell you another truth. A lazy man can lie a hell of a lost faster than a truthful and careful man can research the facts.

And yes I'm calling some folks -- lazy.

1 month ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

remoned Anonymous

"To the absolute best of my knowledge there has NEVER"... seems to be crux of your debate, Jef. Apparently you don't attend many school board meetings, read many news papers concerning the subject, or watch as many one sided, negative school reports on LISD as the people who live here, who are routinely subjected to them on a routine basis. If you did then you would witness first hand all of which i just described as having been 'leaked', fed or reported to the various media outlets and community ears, as 'fact'.

Nor are you privy to, it seems, the community backlash here in Lancaster, as a result of such unfounded, and in actuality, untruthful inuendo...

The 'facts' as you stated are, that the results that Dr. Lewis and staff have yeilded in 5 years here, has the district headed in an upwards and positive direction, as contrasted with that which the media and it's 'insider' anti Larry Lewis contingent would have you believe. test scores are up, Lancaster is NOT the worst school district in the area, there IS good that is going on here in this district, and whether you like him or not Dr. Lewis HAS done an admiral job. But you'd never know that from any reports you've heard and or read in the press.

When you compare Lancaster's numbers to Lancaster's numbers BEFORE he arrived, therin lies the progress. I, as a Lancaster citizen, could care less about what's going on in Dallas, Highland Park, or anywhere else in the country. We're talking about Lancaster and it's progress made. Which naysayers would have the county at large, believe is headed backwards and not forwards, as again TEST RESULTS compared to LISD 2003 compared to 2008 clearly show.

And you're wrong, district scores are not below state levels with the possible exception of the high schools math scores. In every other area, and with every other school, in all areas, they have exceeded or passed state required levels. According to Dalas morning news published statewide TAKS scores.

As for Greg Stevensons comments, they don't dignify a response, except to say what i've said all along. I could care less about Dr. Lewis, i don't know the man. Nor have I agreed with every move of his, the 4 day school week being chief among them, however, what i HAVE seen is the progress made in this district under his tenure, and have witnessed the travesty that unfolds at every school board meeting, as a result of the witch hunt led by the board president and her cronies, to have the man removed by any means neccesary.. smear campaign to sway public perception, included.

Case in point, the current suspension did not come about as a result of his 'performance evaluation'... yet rather as a result of a parental complaint behind an incident that occurred at the Lancaster / Ennis football game. You do the math. If we can't get him on his performance, let's find 'something', anything to use to get rid of him.

I'm not about Dr. Lewis, I'm about what's right.

Jef I respect your opinion, especially as it is based, to the best of your knowledge on imperical data, and less on 'follow the mob' theology.

But as for every item of contention I have listed in this or previous reports with regards to what i call, 'false, misleading or outright lies and inuendo', I have first hand knowldge of by way of having witnessed such claims being made in board meetings, as well as newspaper reports I have, and newsreports I've seen first hand.

Therefore, my knowledge is not to the best of... my claims are factual.

1 month ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

chrisdanger Anonymous

You also have to take into account LISD has been a dumping ground for other districts problem kids for years(most from DISD and Wilmer-Hutchins). Add to the fact most of the board already has this disenfranchised " I dont care" attitude when it comes to their jobs and the kids education, which makes you see why this district is in the state its in.

1 month ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

interestedcitizen Anonymous

Ramoned

You made two testable statements. First, you alleged that Lancaster scores are better now than they were when Lewis arrived. Is that true? It is only partly true. As for the average SAT score, I've proven that we've gained one point, from 808 to 809, since he arrived, after we fell to 802 during his tenure. That's the truth and all you need to determine the truth is click the link to the TEA website that I've included above.

jefmelch has already injected sufficient doubt into TAKS scores to question whether they really measure significant progress, given that Lancaster remains lower than area schools, and area schools' scores are rising.

Second, you alleged that Lancaster scores are higher than they were before Lewis arrived. Is that true? With respect to SAT scores, it is barely true. We gained a point on the SAT while the state gained two points, meaning the gap between us and statewide performance widened by one point. As I've pointed out, our average SAT score is 182 points below the state average and 212 points below the national average, when, in 1993, we were within 3 ponts of state average. Further, I've given you a link to the College Board, where you will find that our SAT mean score is far below the mean SAT score for children from families making less than $10,000.00 per year. Our SAT mean score is far below the lowest performing group nationally on the SAT.

You don't care what they are doing in Highland Park, Cedar Hill, Carrolton-Farmers Branch, Copppell, or other area districts? How myopic. One of these days, our children are going to be competing against those children for jobs and educational opportunities. If we continue to look myopically at the small progress we've made locally and give ourselves high fives and pats on the back while refusing to look at how people are doing around us, we are going to mislead our children down the primrose path to complacency.

Again, instead of making veiled references to lies and innuendo, name one specific lie and let us test the truth of what you allege is a lie.

Remember what Lewis said in September of 2003, "Give me $75 million in February and I'll give you the best district in the nation in five years." We gave him $110 million, and the first structure he completed with that money was a stadium, with an indoor practice field and luxurious pressbox. He failed to renovate West Main and Pleasant Run Elementary as promised in the $110 million bond issue. It's been five years since he made that statement. How can we possibly say we are best in the nation, when our mean SAT scores are 212 points below the national average, and when it is far lower than the average SAT score of children from families earning less than $10,000.00 per year?

What in this comment is false? What is innuendo? Point it out, and let us test it in the record.

1 month ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

remoned Anonymous

First of all, "Interested", being that Dr. Lewis took over in 2003, the question asked is what happened with the previous admin between the numbers of 1993, which you taught, and the ten years leading up to 2003, when Lewis took over? I gave you the increases in test scores TAKS wise, as accorded by Dallas Morning news, for one, which show improved test scores from then until now, 2003-2008. I'm assuming, and correct me if I'm wrong, that your'w wanting to blame lewis for the low performing scores that were already here before he arrived. Again, you referenced 1993, a decade before he took the job.

I'll accept your claims on the SAT numbers and averages, however the comments I've made have been with regards to published TAKS scores, which is the basis for academic performance and school evaluations here in the state of Texas, not SAT scores. Howvwer I will also contend that as the TAKS scores across the board for the school district continue to rise, as with a trickle down effect, the SAT scores should eventually start to rise as well. One must build a base first, before attempting to build a structure.

As for not being concerned with other districts that my children will have to compete with, again this district has in house issues and concerns that it must FIRST fix, before worrying about contending abroad. One hand washes the other. Instead of worrying so much about what 'others' are doing, I prefer to worry about fixing 'us'. Once that is accomplished, everything else works itself out. In addittion, the implementation of the International Baccularate curriculum, reporetedly the highest rated curriculum in the world, now functioning here in lancaster, should ALSO solve alot of the low performing test scores, as well as render SAt scores and the like obsolete. but I'm sure doubters and naysayers have some negative speil about that accomplishement of LISD as well.

Complacency begins when critics of progress, including parents, students and bloggers tear down every positive stride made within the district no matter how great or small, case in point: the hiring of AP instructors, by Dr. Lewis who came in and attempted to raise the level of academic excellence and expectation in the classrooms, thereby causing a myriad of students and parents to complain that their initial test grades were so low, because they had not been used to being challenged on a higher academic level. They all wanted the teachers fired, instead of accepting the fact that the school and the community now expect, no demand better. That's complacency. That's what happened at the high school in 2004. Want another example? When the current principals of certain under performing elementary schools were reassigned or released, or replaced... petitions were signed and enemies declared because Dr. Lewis would dare get rid of our principal and bring in some one else and expect of them to do the job that the current staff failed at. I could go on, but I digress.

FYI, the new stadium was built BEFORE the new school because it did'nt take as long to build. Ground was broken on both simultaneously. Rennovations for other schools as well as shortcomings on the stadium itself were the result of the rising costs of steel and labor, which change from day to day, let alone from the time of initial quoating of costs, to the time of finalization of structures. That's the cost of doing business in today's economy. Some things really are as simple as they seem, not everything has an ulterior motive. Except to the skeptics. Of course.

As for rennovations on other schools, again. Money ran out. Hence another bond was proposed to adress the very thing, but was voted down by the opposition.

As for lies and innuendo, and I speak of smear campaigning and presenting Lancaster ina bad light to the communities and in fact the world at large.

Lie - At the Sept 8th board meeting one board member stated to another that the reason LISD is under the watch of a financial conservator is because of the poor financial state the district has been in. Truth - According to a newspaper report published in the Lancaster Today shortly after the arrival of the conservator, according to the TEA president in Austin, the reason a conservator was sent to the district was at the request of the board president.

Lie - A current Dallas Morning News report states that the board president told them that the district's budget will fall $4 million short. Which, when asked about the statement at the 10/14 board meeting, she denies any knowledge of any newspaper statements attributed to her.

Truth - The district is facing around a $1.5 mil budget setback, unless a remedy is found including but not specifically, budget cutbacks, employee layoffs, or salary cuts.

Lie - several remarks have been made, at board meetings during community remarks, by apparent citizens and former staff members proclaiming LISD to be the worst of the worst in area school districts. With poor performing test scores.

Truth - Having all schools in the district with the exception of the h.s. pass all aspects of the TAKS, (The h.s. missed out by 5% points in one area of the 4 areas required), Contrasted with the reports that Desoto ISD had 3 schools failed and Dallas ISD has 6 high schools alone, not meet state standards, should lay that claim to rest. A claim that even the board president herself, remarked at a 9/8 board metting.

Lie - Leaked reports througout the community that LISD has up to $6 mil missing.

Truth - The last audit of LISD showed that less than 1% of the budget was in discrepency.

Lie - according to the 10/16 edition of the Lancaster Today, "Lewis' speech focused on teh academic improvements of students in LISD. He didn;t mention the financial and budget problems that are currently facing the district."

Truth - At the 10/14 board meeting, which the Lancaster Today referenced, Dr. lewis spent 45 mins to an hour detailing the budget shortcomings as well as a proposal to remedy the problem, in accordance with meetings he had with the conservator between 10/1 - 10/7, as well as meetings with over 60 LISD personnel (principles, etc.) And then proposed a budget amendment that would not see any layoffs of jobs, or any salary reductions.

Lie - Dr. Lewis inflated the attendance numbers in order to get more money for the district.

Truth - The formula used to 'project' upcoming attendance is based on current years attendance records in addition to current and previous years 'growth' records, hence giving you an 'estimated' total enrollment going into the upcoming year. Money is granted the districts in accordance. This year LISD fell shy of their "estimated projected growth" by 213 seats/kids. That translates roughly to about $1.1 mil in money granted the districts budget, that is being spent for seats that aren't being used.

I could go on. But the point is, all of the good this district has accomplished is constantly negated in the press and in the public by skeptics and critics all over. In favor of publishing the 'negative', which is usually stretched or simply untrue, yet peiople run with it as if it is the reported 'gospel'.

1 month ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

remoned Anonymous

In the current 10/16 edition of lancaster Today,there's an article written by a LISD junior and Lanacaster Today staff member which sums it up.

"Why do so many people have so many negative things to say about Lancaster ISD? What have we done, or what haven't we done? Everyone has an idea of why LISD is so badly spoken of, and here's mine:
My dad once told me that despite all of your achievements, people gravitate towards your errors. Society always seem to focus on the blunders rather than the victories.
We have had some good things go on academically at our school. AcDec, JROTC, and trhe international Bacculaureate, just to name the most significant. Do we ever hear about these things in the local news? Yes, but less often than necessary. The community is weighed down with the allegations, crime, misconduct and failure that unfortunately go on at Lancaster high School. Very few locals are even presented with information concerning the accomplishments, feats and humanity that go on here also. And if they do have that information, it is often brushed aside as a fluke. This drives people to believe that Lancaster has nothing more to offer than deliquent minority children who don;t have the skills to get ahead in life. I beg to differ. Since being in Lancaster ISD, I have made some of the most rewarding decisions of my life.
The teachers I have are deeply intellectual ands give me the tools I use in and out of the school. My classmates are spirited individuals who understand each other.
Our principals do so much to keep the focus level up and seem determined to erase any doubt in people's minds that Lancaster students aren't capable of doing what any other district can. I don;t get discouraged when people judge what goes on at my school because I know what my teachers and administrators have brought to the table. But just like any othe rproud student at lancaster, i become irritated when people approach me with constructive criticism about my school.
No one has the right to judge me, my classmates, or our level of intellect without a balanced examination of our strengths and our weaknesses. Sure we make mistakes, but who doesn't? Once anyone can answer that question, then only then will i consider their opinion. but until then, i will remain a proud, rational, exemplary student who is a product of the instruction that tkaes place at LISD."

This kid gets it. Kudos.

1 month ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

jefmelch Anonymous

Remoned says:

" Lancaster is NOT the worst school district in the area, there IS good that is going on here in this district, and whether you like him or not Dr. Lewis HAS done an admiral job. "

The general job, however, has been un-done.

That's a joke.

I'm sure Dr Lewis has admirable skills and talents. Math is not among them.

Let me repeat. Scores ARE rising. But not any faster than "inflation", as evidenced by other districts. Get out your pencil and chart paper -- if you're under 25, grab the TI-84 calculator -- and plot the data yourself. The Dallas Morning News has compiled it here:

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedconte...

And if you're the sort of person who listens to Rush Limbaugh and distrusts the "Drive-By Media" you can double check the DMN's numbers with the Texas Education Agency, here:

http://www.tea.state.tx.us/perfreport...

Or you could just look at this message thread and read what I set before you. 3rd Grade Reading TAKS scores. Lancaster ISD. Worst in the county. Headed down, from 82% passing in 2007 to only 76% passing in 2008. The second-worst district, Dallas ISD, had 77% -- one point better, and at the very least is holding steady rather than falling behind over the period 2007 vs 2008.

Assume I'm lying. Then prove me wrong. What measures, OTHER than 3rd grade reading, are so strikingly and admirably rising?

If Lancaster is NOT posting the worst TAKS scores in the area -- let's agree on Dallas County as a working definition of 'the area' -- then name the district or districtS that Lancaster has surpassed.

You probably won't. You say, instead:

"I, as a Lancaster citizen, could care less about what's going on in Dallas, Highland Park, or anywhere else in the country."

Which strikes me as an odd attitude. Are we also to suppose you could care less than to see if the neighbors lights are on, when your own black out? That you could care less than check the price of gas at a station down the block than the one on your corner? That you'd rather just watch whatever is on the tube currently than work the remote and surf channels?

Again, it's the lazy approach to assume that what Larry Lewis and Pat Sadberry say about the test scores is the whole story.

1 month ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

interestedcitizen Anonymous

Ramoned,

OK, let's pretend SAT scores are irrelevant. (I think that is a mistake because algebra II is really important and SAT does test the ability to use Algebra II to solve real life problems) Anyway, let's use TAKS data. I don't have 2007 or 2008 results because they aren't posted at the state's website. However, lets observe some trends from 2003 through 2006 to see if LHS was closing any gaps during that period. Again, if you dispute my numbers, go to the AEIS website.

http://www.tea.state.tx.us/cgi/sas/br...

I'm comparing 11th grade performance over the years from 2003-2006

In 2003 61% of LHS 11th graders met the minimum passing TAKS score on ELA (English Language Arts) while 70% met the minimum standard satewide, a difference of 9 points. In 2006, 80% of LHS 11th graders met the standard, while statewide 89% met the standard, a difference of 9 points. In 2004, there was a 14 point difference between the percentage of LHS students passing TAKS and the percentage of students statewide passing the ELA section of TAKS.

I'm not saying a 60% passing rate is good, but where is the evidence that 11th graders were reading at a 3rd grade level then? Where is the evidence of a dramatic gain in literacy in a short period of time? Yes, there were gains, but an achievement gap remains in a test of minimum skills only.

In 2003 49% of LHS 11th graders made the minimum TAKS score on Math while the satewide 68% met the minimum score, a difference of 19 points. In 2006, 57% of LHS 11th graders made the minimum score on Math, while statewide 78% made the minimum socre, a difference of 21 points. The gap widened by 2 points during 3 years of Lewis' tenure.

In 2003 48% of LHS 11th graders made the minimu score on TAKS on Science while satewide 68% did so, a difference of 20 points. In 2006, 44% of LHS 11th graders made the minimum score on Science, while statewide 76% did so, a difference of 32 points. The gap widened by 12 points during Lewis' tenure.

There was no gap in the performance of LHS students on the Social Studies portion of TAKS and that of students statewide. However, in 2004 and 2005, the gap widened to 3 and 9 points respectively, before coming back to 0

In 2003 33% of LHS 11th graders met the minimum score on all tests while satewide 50% did so, a difference of 17 points. In 2006, 34% of LHS 11th graders made the minimum score on TAKS, while statewide 66% did so, a difference of 32 points. The gap between the percentage of LHS 11th graders passing TAKS and those statewide passing TAKS grew by 15 percentage points in three years of Lewis' tenure

From these data, we see that the gap between performance by LHS 11th graders and state wide 11th graders on all tests grew by 15 points during Lewis tenure. In no single category did the gap narrow. In both math and science, the gap widened, while in ELA, the gap remained the same.

Tell me, given SAT scores that have only budged one point, that remain below the average for students from households earning less than $10,000 annually, and that remain 212 points below national SAT scores and 182 points below Texas average SAT scores, where is the proof that Lewis has dramatically increased academic performance in LISD? The truth is, we haven't kept pace with increased increased academic performance statewide.

1 month ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

ch0 Anonymous

I can't count the number of times I've had to factor polynomials in everyday life. Thank God for High School!

1 month ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

remoned Anonymous

Interested, your still comparing LISD to statewide scores, rather than LISD 2003, to LISD 2008.

To that regard one can always argue the glass being half empty as opposed to half full.

Jeff, I don't listen to Rush Limbaugh, he's nothing more than a republican shill. Wait... I'm accused of being a Dr. Lewis shill... how ironic. (One bad joke deserves another, eh?) And comparing Dallas ISD to lancaster, is comparing apples to oranges as Dallas ISD has a totality of schools for which to balance it's numbers out, does it not? Where's Lancaster compared to other one horse schools/towns like Desoto, and Cedar Hill? I think that'd be a more apt comparison.

"Let me repeat. Scores ARE rising. But not any faster than "inflation", as evidenced by other districts" Since when is rising scores NOT a good thing? Regardless of the rate at which progress is made? This is the kind of "rain on the parade" media and misinformed community reporting that has the world at large viewing Lancaster in a bad light as is.

Travis, you have some good points. "would we hear about any of this if there weren't serious problems within the Lancaster school district? Are we to assume everything is just fine?"

First, according to conservator Damms last report, "Contention between the board is at a much better level now, and everyone seems to be getting along fine". Visit a school board meeting. Then answer the obvious question you'll ask yourself: "1. What board meetings is he attending? and 2. What's his agenda?"

"If this is simply a matter of personality conflicts, then maybe all the idiots involved need to be fired and replaced with people who can get on with the business of education instead of continual pissing contests." I agree wholeheartedly. instead reality is such that, it IS a simple matter of a pissing contest. any intelligent person attending any board meet can deduce as such. Question: If all the negative uproar is indeed about poor performance, why does Dr. Lewis still have a job? The board is well within their right to release him based on failing to perform upto the task which they hired him for.

Also, if the rumors circulating throughout the community and in published reports of mismangement of funds, and outstanding budget shortcomings, and gross neglect and abuse of district credit cards/monies is all true, then why has he not been fired? The conservators investigation alone would have been sufficient enough to grant the board the approval, is needed, to release him.

Thusly, if his copnduct is so bad, or detrimental that it deserves to be investigated, why are the investigation charges as frivoulous as "insubordination to the board president" which one would think the board had the power to fire the man, for that alone.... in addition to charges of mail tampering , and witholding information from the board president and not passing it along ina timely fashion. We're waisting tax payers dolllars to the tune of $30 grand a month on this? Again, if these are the facts as reported or believed by the board, why is'nt he fired?

Any intelligent person can obviously see the smear campaign in effect. "Destroy the character and reputation of said individual by ruining his reputation in the community, as well as gain some momentum in the court of public opinion. None of this is about performance evaluation. Let eveyone on here tell it, he has'nt done squat jobwise, test wise, or anything else. Then, why is he not fired? Gieven the fact that the majority vote of the board, is unhappy with him? it's not rocket science. My thing is, don;t feed me your "It's all about the children" line, when your taking money ut of the childrens classrooms as well as their teachers salaries, and spending it on investigations and conservators that you requested, despite the audit findings of little to no wrongdoings. When you have the autonomy to release the man, as his employer, if you are not happy with his work. Riddle me that, Batman.

Finally, "Maybe the kids gets it, but some lessons in grammar, spell check, and sentence structure, wouldn't hurt." nor would a haircut, what are you, 4oish?

1 month ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

ch0 Anonymous

October 2008 is National Straw Man month!

1 month ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

ch0 Anonymous

@ Mr. Rice: Sorry, Pops. They had me at 'x'.

@ Travis: Teachers and administrators dislike criticism, constructive or otherwise. That is why they became teachers, and not productive members of society.

HA! I kid, I kid...

God Bless the Lancaster ISD

1 month ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

remoned Anonymous

Travis, you continue to mock a student proud of his district, as well as made a joke, albeit a poor one... and quite racy at that, at blogger Cho's expense. (and they likey teh maths..long time!) Yet you fail to see the humor in the long haired hippy remark?

My apologies if you took offense to MY attempt at humor, however it looks like the pot calls the kettle black.

And for the record, I'm not here to prove points or bring credence to my own stance. My goal is simply to bring the truth of what goes on behind the scenes and here at LISD board meetings so that folk, like yourself, can have the full grasp of information from which to formulate opinions.

Instead of simply basing them on the wealth of negative stories written and reported on in the press, shown on tv, and spread around the communities by way of rumors and gossip.

Someone asked yesterday, would all this be reported if it was not true? There's 2 sides or more to a story. Why only report one? Which everyone knows, regarding the media... "Controvery creates ratings, and sex sells". It's this type of approach that's killing out society as is. Then we wonder why our youth, our morals, and our standards are going to hell in a handbasket.

I for one,am tired of seeing only the negative press written and covered in this district, usually, again, based on rumors and unfounded allegations.

Yet when I come on and say, there really are some good things going on here in this district, folk like yourself, counter that with, skepticism and refute.

On the other hand someone can come on and report that Dr. Lewis is stealing money and everyone who read's this will take it as gospel.

So, you continue to , berate, belittle and bemoan the students of Lancaster and their district, I'm sure the people you educate, will be quite proud of you.

1 month ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

Acntx Anonymous

As a Lancaster resident and the brother of a LHS student, I am frustrated by the whole situation. Over the past few months, you could tell that nothing more than a spark was needed to set off yet another firestorm in the district. Well, that spark has been ignited and the fire is out of control! I don't belong to a particular "camp" (pro-superintendent, anti-superintendent, pro-board, etc.) or support a particular individual. I support the students of Lancaster ISD. In a way, I am glad that all of this is happening now rather than six months or a year later. The sooner that the various issues are dealt with, the sooner that the district can move forward.

I have been a long time visitor to this site because of its coverage of LISD and Lancaster news. My respect for the site has grown tremendously with the coverage of this story because the reader commentary has been much more civil than that of the Dallas Morning News (DMN), which is filled with vile and narrow-minded comments on just about every article that pertains to the city of Lancaster and its school district. Here, opinions are - for the most part - thoughtfully discussed without degenerating into name-calling and personal attacks. On the DMN site, I have read messages labeling all LISD students as "ignorant" and "looking for nothing but a handout" as well as describing the entire city of Lancaster a "cesspool", "dump", and a "ghetto". I don't even want to go into the ones that border on outright racism. Usually, things like that don't get to me, but some of the lies and generalizations were so outrageous that even a person open to hearing all points of view would be offended. I would ask Lancaster residents to take a look at the DMN articles on the district's budget issues that have been published in the last week or so to see exactly what I am talking about. The Lancaster that some of them are describing is NOT the Lancaster that I call home.

1 month ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

interestedcitizen Anonymous

Remoded

First of all, will you tell me why Lancaster ISD only publishes its AEIS data on its website for 04-05 instead of later years? If it can't maintain its website, why doesn't it link to the TEA website for more current data? Why do you think Lancaster would want to deceive the world by making the world think it has a recognized high school? It appears that only telling part of the truth is a habit, custom, and routine for this district. It is public relations, and the business of public relations is the business of pulling the nuggets of favorable information out of a pile of unfavorable information and making it appear that the nugggets of favorable information reflect the general situation.

I think the problem is deeper. Lewis has been quoted, "to do the impossible, one has to see the invisible." He also said, "believe it and you will see it." Remember his most grand statement, back in 2003, "give me $75 million February and I will give you the best school district in the nation in five years." He issued the challenge. He set the deadline. Back in 2003, he told us to compare ourselves with the nation in 2008. We're doing it, and we're clearly not what he promised we would be.

These are words of someone who sees himself a messiah. It is clear that he subscribes to the prosperity gospel, which is that one only has to speak a word and that word will become true.

We shouldn't ignore how Lancaster is competing with Dallas and area schools, or schools nationwide, but for the sake of discussion let's compare how Lancaster did against DeSoto and Cedar Hill from 2003-2006, the only years for which AEIS data are published at the TEA website. Again, click the link above to get the raw data. Here's a summary.

In ELA, DeSoto started out 17 points ahead of Lancaster in 2003 and finished 13 points ahead in 2006. Cedar Hill started out 4 points ahead and finished 9 points ahead.

In Math, DeSoto started out 15 points ahead and finished 5 points ahead. Cedar Hill started out 14 points ahead and finished 6 points ahead.

In Science, DeSoto started out 18 points ahead and finished 47 points ahead. Cedar Hill started out 17 points ahead and finished 19 points ahead in just three years

In Social Studies, DeSoto started out 1 point ahead and finished 1 point behind. Cedar Hill started out 2 points ahead and finished 0 points ahead.

On all tests, DeSoto started out 16 points ahead and finished 17 points ahead. Cedar Hill started out 11 points ahead and finished 14 points ahead.

In summary, except in Social Studies, DeSoto and Cedar Hill are maintaining their lead against Lancaster, although the math gap is narrowing. Overall, however, the gap in performance between Lancaster and that of Cedar Hill and DeSoto widened between 2003-2006.

I think what we are trying to say is that we hear too much puffing and spin by the Superintendent at public meetings. He's deceptive, because he doesn't put our gains in context with what is happening around us. We don't really know how significant or meaningful our gains are unless we compare them with other districts. This is particularly important when we hear that TAKS is a moving target rather than a fixed and certain standard.

I am saying the SAT is a better measure of academic achievement because it is more static from year to year and it is not a moving target. Therefore, when SAT scores barely budge, while TAKS scores move upward, it is reasonable to conclude that that TAKS is either getting easier, or that TAKS measures only minimum skills, and not the skills necessary to make high scores on the SAT.

SAT scores are relevant because they are predictors of success in college. Like it or not, if a person doesn't learn Algebra II, he or she is going to face severe challenges as a nurse, a pharmacist, an engineer, a surveyor, a stock analyst, an actuary, a financial advisor, a loan counselor, a retirement plan administrator, an excavating contractor, a building contractor, or an architect. I don't want a pharmacist dispensing my drugs who didn't do well on Algebra II. I don't want a nurse who flunked Algebra II to be the last clear chance to save my life when he or she administers a faulty prescription to me. I don't want an architect to design ramps and stairways who didn't do well on Algebra II. I definitely don't want to trust my life in a tall building, a skywalk, or a suspension bridge to engineers who didn't do well on algebra II.

Do you think all of these crane accidents this summer might have had something to do with people who didn't do the basic math problem force x lever arm equals force x lever arm? That's first year algebra and basic physics. Don't you think all of these cost overruns on these buidlings have something to do with contractors not factoring in the reasonably forseeable increases in the cost of supplies when they make their bids? Do you think it is possible that they low bid just to get the job, and then seek price adjustments later? Proper use of Algebra II might reveal flaws in bidders' basic character. Algebra II is used in business planning, and in all kinds of decision making where multiple factors need to be considered. To pass off Algebra II as irrelevant in today's world is utter foolishness.

1 month ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

ch0 Anonymous

SAT scores are not necessarily reliable predictors of success in college. A propensity for working hard is a much better predictor of collegiate & real-world success. You can be a brilliant test-taker with a very high SAT score, and still completely screw up in college. (or so I hear...)

It would impossible to get an engineering degree without a mastery of Algebra II. Engineering undergrad courses are 80% higher maths. Virtually every degree for the professions you listed require calculus, so your examples are mostly silly.

What percentage of the total workforce is represented by the professions you listed? A small one. Your list of lofty vocations does not represent a realistic cross-section of what Lancaster ISD graduates will do with their lives. The average person at the average job does not use much of anything they learned in high school. Basic arithmetic & basic literacy are all things picked up before high school (hopefully).

Critical thinking, financial literacy, and people skills are all much more vital tools to one's real-world success than the ability to multiply matrices or memorize the quadratic equation.

We can't all be actuaries and financial advisors. Somebody has to actually produce something around here, not to mention hire and manage the nurses, pharmacists, engineers, and analysts.

"Utter foolishness" would be better defined as the incurious force-feeding of hollow curricula these school districts attempt to pass off as "education". Vocational training is so much more useful.

Algebra IS vital for the higher professions, don't get me wrong - I'm just sayin'...

1 month ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

interestedcitizen Anonymous

Remoned

A couple of other comments about what Ramoned characterized as lies

He said that at the September 8 meeting, trustee Morris made a false statement about why the TEA conservator was here. He says the conservator is here because president Morris asked for one. In fact, in a June meeting, where James Damm was introduced, trustee Morris asked why the Conservator was here. Ron Rowell said that a Conservator was here because of the findings in the TEA audit, not because any individual had asked the Conservator to come.

He also mischaracterized a statement allegedly made by Morris in the DMN. According to the DMN article, a statement attributed to Morris said the deficit could be as high as $3.6 million. We only know about the $1.5 million shortfall due to a shortfall in student attendance. What we don't yet know is how much our revenues will be short due to overpayments from the state last year that will have to be recouped this year because attendance fell short of projections last year.

Remoned also mischaracterized as a lie a report by the Today Lancaster newspaper in which Today Lancaster reported that Lewis ommitted any reference to the district's financial problems in his "state of the district" speech to the Chamber of Commerce. Lewis didn't talk about the district's financial problems in that speech last Thursday. The Today article covered last Thursday's speech to the Chamber. He focused solely on academic gains. It wasn't until Monday night at the school board meeting that he spoke of the district's financial problems.

There are other lies in Remoned's list that are statements of straw men. That is, those statements, such as the missing $6 million, have never been attributed to any individual.

As jefmelch says, it is easy to erect a straw men, attribute statements of that straw man to one's opponents, and then smear one's opponents with "guilt by association" with the straw man. Fortunately, this forum allows us to expose the "straw man" argument for what it is.

1 month ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

remoned Anonymous

"Interested" I have no idea why LISD has no current AEIS data on it's website, but I'll make it a point to ask that question during the next 'citizen's comments' portion of the next board meeting. Although, since the forum is not a Q and A session, i won't readily be given an answer, so maybe I'll shoot the board staff an email instead. ut rest assured, i'm ontop of it.

Also, I appreciate the insightfulness and quality of your first response. It's full of data and research and very thought provoking opinions, on your behalf.

However, concerning your second reply, regarding my contributions in one of my previous admissions.... not so much.

I stand corrected on the Lancaster today article regarding the ommission of Dr. Lewis' budget updates. I went back and took anothe rlook at the article and sure enough, I glossed right over the 10/9 date, that the paper lists as it's source of reference. I'm man enough to admit that I erred.

However, allow me to correct your misquoting of MY statement.

I never said Mrs. Morris made a false statement about why the conservator was here. first of all I made careful mention not to call any board member by name in that piece. What i said of the board president, Mrs. Morris, was that the newspaper report, reported that accroding to their conversation with the TEA president, HE claimed that the reason a concervator was sent to the district was at the request of Mrs. Morris. The paper also goes on to say that she denies the claim. Well, someone's lieng, either the TEA president, Mrs. Moriss, or the newspaper. But the report is factual.

Secondly, I never names the board member that made the claim as to why the conservator came to town, nor did I mention that the board president did so, the term I normally use to refer to Mrs. Morris. But FYI the board member that made the remark was Mrs. Mexia, to board member Ed Kirkland... again, at the 9/8 board meet. I was there. Were you?

I have no idea who Ron Rowell is, so I'm in no position to comment on whomever he is.

Although I will say, with regards to Mrs. Morriss' posturing at board meetings, she also feigned ignorance to the fact that she didn't know the law firm was going to show up at the board meeting that they were hired at, but was soundly embarrased when the law assistant corrected her by refuting her claim, by stating, "Yes, you should have known we were coming, as in accordacne with the conversation you had with Mr. Jones". He of the Jones law firm which was hired. So, spin that how you will.

I'll say this of Mr. Damm, I had high hopes for him and his time spent her ein the district, but after his latest report and the statement he made that the contention between the board seems to have eased, (And i'm paraphrasing), having attended every board meeting since BEFORE he made such a statement and seen how each board meeting is more of a circus than the next... I begin to question his judgement, if not his agenda.

You say according to the DMN article the number Mrs. Morriss stated was $3.6 mil and not $4 mil. Okay, we'll use your number. In either event, again at the 10/14 board meeting, when pressed on the matter, she has no knowledge of any newspaper reports or remarks attributed to the paper by herself.

I stand on the fact that there are no LIEs in my claims. Unlike yourself, who openly boasts "to the best of my knowledge..." I had provided the facts as I've switrnessed first hand. "To the best of my knowledge" loosely translates to "In actuality, I have no idea".

Well, I do. Although I appreciate your thoughtful debate.

ACNTX, according to their article has heard/seen the same rumors, inuendo, and negative press that i come on here to refute. Welcome ACNTX, but be forewarned, it's just a matter of time before you're mail is picked apart, scrutinized and labeled as mistruths as well.

But keep the faith. There are those of us who actually see the positives that are occuring here in our city.

1 month ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

interestedcitizen Anonymous

Remoned:

OK, when I tried to paraphrase what you characterized as a lie, you say I lied, so I will now quote you verbatim and then respond by showing that what you characterize as a lie is not a lie:

You wrote "Lie - At the Sept 8th board meeting one board member stated to another that the reason LISD is under the watch of a financial conservator is because of the poor financial state the district has been in. Truth - According to a newspaper report published in the Lancaster Today shortly after the arrival of the conservator, according to the TEA president in Austin, the reason a conservator was sent to the district was at the request of the board president."

My response: First of all what are you claiming to be the lie? Are you saying it is a lie that one board member told another board member at the September 8th meeting that a conservator is here for financial reasons, or are you saying it is a lie that the conservator is here for financial reasons? And are you saying that the truth is that the Lancaster Today reported that the conservator is here because the board president asked the conservator to come, and not because of financial reasons?

I'll accept it as true that at the September 8th meeting one member told another that the conservator is here for financial reasons. However assuming you meant to say that it is a lie that the conservator is here for financial reasons, and not because Carolyn Morris asked for a conservator, I will respond.

In the TEA audit, the TEA recommended a conservator as one of several options to remedy some financial management problems revealed in the audit. It left the decision up to TEA commissioner Robert Scott whether to send a conservator. I've read the audit. Have you? If not, you need to get a copy and read it. I will accept as true that the Today Lancaster reported that the conservator is here at the request of Morris. It might be true that Carolyn Morris requested the conservator, but the TEA wouldn't send a conservator at her request alone. In a June meeting, Ron Rowell, a spokesperson with the TEA, in introducing Jim Damm to Lancaster citizens at a school board meeting, answered a direct question of Carolyn Morris by saying Jim Damm is here solely because of the TEA audit results and not because he was requested by any individual citizen.

You wrote: "Lie - A current Dallas Morning News report states that the board president told them that the district's budget will fall $4 million short. Which, when asked about the statement at the 10/14 board meeting, she denies any knowledge of any newspaper statements attributed to her.

Truth - The district is facing around a $1.5 mil budget setback, unless a remedy is found including but not specifically, budget cutbacks, employee layoffs, or salary cuts."

The whole truth: Again it is hard to determine what you characterize as a lie. Are you saying it is a lie that the Dallas Morning News reported Carolyn Morris as having said that the budget is $4 million short, or are you saying that Carolyn Morris told a lie to the DMN by saying the budget is $4 million short?

I read the DMN article. It quoted Carolyn Morris as saying the deficit could be as large as $3.6 million. It did not quote her as saying it was definitely $3.6 million and it certainly didn't quote her as saying it was definitely $4 million. I didn't hear her flatly deny at the Board meeting that she had spoken to the press about the deficit. I did hear her say she hadn't read the article and didn't know what the article said. She refused to be misquoted. There is a difference between saying the deficit is $4 million and saying the deficit could be as large as $3.6 million. All we know right now is that the deficit is at least $1.5 million due to the shortfall in student attendance. It could be much larger due to other factors. The words attributed to Carolyn Morris in the DMN are not false. She was quoted as saying the deficit could be as high as $3.6 million, not that the deficit was in fact that large. Until we know the final numbers, it is really too early to condemn anyone for statements made to the press aobout the deficit.

You wrote: "Lie - several remarks have been made, at board meetings during community remarks, by apparent citizens and former staff members proclaiming LISD to be the worst of the worst in area school districts. With poor performing test scores.

Truth - Having all schools in the district with the exception of the h.s. pass all aspects of the TAKS, (The h.s. missed out by 5% points in one area of the 4 areas required), Contrasted with the reports that Desoto ISD had 3 schools failed and Dallas ISD has 6 high schools alone, not meet state standards, should lay that claim to rest. A claim that even the board president herself, remarked at a 9/8 board metting."

The whole truth: Jefmelch's comment pretty well puts to rest the truth that Lancaster's TAKS results put Lancaster at the bottom of area districts. My response above shows that Lancaster was further behind DeSoto and Cedar Hill on 11th grade TAKS in 2006 than it was in 2003, after three years of Lewis' tenure.

Again, no one is saying Lancaster hasn't made gains on TAKS. However, we are questioning what that means, in light of the fact that the gap between our performance on SAT and national and state performance on SAT remains excessively large.

1 month ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

remoned Anonymous

"Interested",

First, I never called you a lie. I said you misqouted me. "However, allow me to correct your misquoting of MY statement." There's a difference.

Second, I think my statements stand alone, I don't see where the confusion lies, but allow me to clarify. The lie regarding what was told one board member to another as to why the conservator is here, is the first part of the lie. (I have the newspapers report, and the statement of the TEA president attributing the reasons for the conservator being sent, I have also been told firts hand by 2 board members that have confirmed the fact).

The second part is that the board president denies the claim. And I am well aware of the board president's posturing at a meeting denying the claim, but as i mentioned in other posts I'm also aware of the board president being caught in numerous lies in the same venues. You draw your own conclusions. If the newspaper made the report up, the newspaper puts itself at risk to legal suits. I'll give the newspaper credit enough to be smarter than that.

As for the TEA audit, I have a copy. I can post it for you if you'd like. Leaving it up to Robert Scott or whomever as to which route to take to handle the situation hardly say that the TEA sent a conservator to the district due to the financial instability of the district, as has been reported by again, board member(s) to say the least. That's a case of playing to the public, who at best, are unaware of the inner workings of what's going on behind the sxcens, i.e. power plays, and witch hunts, yet they know all too well the rumors of stealing, mismanagement, failing test scores, etc. I call it playing to the court of public perception. In most cases perception is reality. As for the board pres.' remarks concerning the DMN article, "I didn't hear her flatly deny at the Board meeting that she had spoken to the press about the deficit. I did hear her say she hadn't read the article and didn't know what the article said. She refused to be misquoted." Please. The woman flat out pretended to have no knowledge of even having talked to a newspaper. Stop making excuses for her. Every time she's been caught in a lie, she gets a sudden case of amnesia. If, what you say is true, that no one had any knowledge of what the final budget deficit could be, then why would you give ANY number to the press, instead of waiting until you had valid numbers with which to back up any claims? I'll allow you to spin that one as you will.

"The whole truth: Jefmelch's comment pretty well puts to rest the truth that Lancaster's TAKS results put Lancaster at the bottom of area districts. My response above shows that Lancaster was further behind DeSoto and Cedar Hill on 11th grade TAKS in 2006 than it was in 2003, after three years of Lewis' tenure."

We're talking about 2008 not 2006. Show me 2008 numbers. Or the equivalent, i.e. the most recent numbers reported by the state. I keep bringing up progress made by the district now, you keep countering with what happened in 1993, and now 2006.

"Again, no one is saying Lancaster hasn't made gains on TAKS. However, we are questioning what that means, in light of the fact that the gap between our performance on SAT and national and state performance on SAT remains excessively large"

You wouldn't be able to tell that no one is denying that Lancaster has made gains on the TAKS due to the amount of rebuttle I've gotten by stating those facts, and I hear and accept your comments on the SAT'S. However, again, being that LISD continues to make strides in the are of rising test scores (TAKS), then it should be just a matter of time before they close gaps in other areas of testing, including SAT scores, as well. Is my only point.

Just FYI, and for anyone interested, rumor around the communities from Red oak, to Lancaster, has it that the ax will be wsung on Dr. Lewis, either at todays 1:30 meeting with the teachers, or monday nights board meet. I'm on my up ther now. I'll update later.

1 month ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

jefmelch Anonymous

RemoneD asks:

http://www.pegasusnews.com/news/2008/...

"And comparing Dallas ISD to lancaster, is comparing apples to oranges ... Where's Lancaster compared to other one horse schools/towns like Desoto... I think that'd be a more apt comparison. "

Okay.

(By the way, thank you for keeping an open mind and being engaged in honest dialog. So many posters just bandy insults and rhetorical questions. It's a joy to exchange views in honest inquiry.)

Let's compare the actual numbers, and compare the highly touted progress and gains in Lancaster to the same measure in DeSoto. Let's start with Reading. We'll compare Lancaster ISD from 2005 to 2008. And then we'll look at the same measure and grades and years in DeSoto.

(tables don't come across well in this format. Sorry.)

_ . LANCASTER . _ _ _ _ _ 2005 _ 2008 Gains

Reading 3rd grade _ 74 _ 76_. _ 2.70%

Reading 4th grade _ 57 _ 70_ _ 22.81%

Reading 5th grade _ 52 _ 74_ _ 42.31%

Reading 6th grade _ 73 _ 82_ _ 12.33%

Reading 7th grade _ 62 _ 69_ _ 11.29%

Reading 8th grade _ 71 _ 83_ _ 16.90%

Reading 9th grade _ 69 _ 68_ _ -1.45%

Reading 10th grad _ 54 _ 72_ _ 33.33%

Reading 11th grad _ 77 _ 85_ _ 10.39%

Now the rivals from across I-35:

DeSoto
Test Year _ _ _ _ _ _ 2005 2008 Gains
Reading 3rd grade _ 85 _ 84 _ _ -1.18%

Reading 4th grade _ 67 _ 74 _ _ 10.45%

Reading 5th grade _ 61 _ 75 _ _ 22.95%

Reading 6th grade _ 77 _ 82 _ _ 6.49%

Reading 7th grade _ 71 _ 78 _ _ 9.86%

Reading 8th grade _ 77 _ 88 _ _ 14.29%

Reading 9th grade _ 80 _ 77 _ _ -3.75%

Reading 10th grad _ 62 _ 77 _ _ 24.19%

Reading 11th grad _ 86 _ 86 _ _ 0.00%

It is entirely correct that Lancaster has acheived gains, and acheived HIGHER gains than DeSoto. For example, at 10th grade passing rates are up 33% in Lancaster, well over DeSoto's 24%. But the pattern also reveals that the MOST dramatic gains in Lancaster parallel the direction and range in DeSoto. That is, whenever Lancaster sees a big gain, (5th, 8th, 10th) Desoto has ALSO seen a big, if not as big, gain. This suggest that the TEST has changed as much as the instructional process.

When critics allege that Lancaster's scores are falling behind, this is what they're talking about. When DeSoto scores go up, so do Lancaster's. When they're down in DeSoto, so too in Lancaster. The TEST is controlling the direction of the changes as much as what's happening locally. And we we start from behind, we stay, or fall father, behind.

Again I would ask you:If Lancaster schools aren't the area's worst, which schools are?

This is a reasonable question. Students today will compete for the jobs and homes and politcal offices of tomorrow. Larry Lewis boasts the International Baccalaureate system will prepare Lancaster kids to compete with kids from anywhere. He boasts of "world class" schools with "state of the art" methods and "unsurpassed results"

It's the height of hypocrisy for him to ignore classes, the state, and results elsewhere; to turn always backward and compare the local scene today with the same scene yesterday.

It's like the farmer told the chickens when he walked into the hen house holding an ostrich egg: "Y'all really need to know what's happening elsewhere..."

Math is the same thing. Giving up on tables let me substitute a long passage of text.

In the past four years with Larry Lewis at the helm (using his admiral abilities) Dr Lewis took our 3rd graders from a 60% passing rate to 67% -- in 2008 reaching the level that DeSoto STARTED OFF with. During that same period, DeSoto third graders advanced FROM 67% up to 79% passing. They gained 12 points in the period Lancaster gained 7. Imagine Coach Larry Lewis explaining to the fans that his team had scored, not only a touchdown, BUT ALSO, the point after. Do you suppose he could get away with neglecting to mention that there had been competition? Do you suppose nobody would care that DeSoto had ended the first half with a 7 point lead and widened the gap by two touchdowns during the period his own team had scored only the 7 points boasted?

But TAKS isn't football. Lucky for Coach Lewis.

Back to reality. Among 4th graders, Lancaster has increased scores from 50% to 65%. That is, LISD has in 2008 NOT YET attained the level DeSoto reached in 2005. Meanwhile DeSoto has leapt ahead up to the mid-70% range.

Between the two 5th grade systems, it's a tighter contest. Lancaster is maintaining a slow but steady increase while DeSoto slipped back one percentage point between 2007 and 2008. Still every single year for the past four, DeSoto has edged out a "win" in the game. If this was football, Lancaster would be looking for a new coach.

At 6th grade -- it's just depressing. In 2006 for one brief shining moment, Lancaster math scores barely touched the 60% passing mark. (That's not quite a "D - " by letter grade.) Then they fell sharply back to the beginning point, 40%. Since then we've seen a slight improvement. Meanwhile, DeSoto, also depressingly, has seen math scores fall. But their team STARTED in the high 60's and has slipped gradually down to a low of 57% -- still vastly ahead of their rivals east of I-35.

DeSoto, in 2005 had an enrollment of 8241 students. Compared to Lancaster that year, with 5827, they had 44% more kids. But they paid their superintedent Alton Frailey $185K. Lancaster, by contrast, with fewer kids, fewer teachers, and worse test scores, paid Larry Lewis that same year $190K. Two percent more money, for over forty percent less responsibility.

By 2008 DeSoto had seen enrollment rise to 8889. But starting off with a new superintendent, Lloyd Treadwell, they LOWERED the payrate to $164K. Meanwhile, in Lancaster, enrollment fell. The exact figures are still being disputed. Call it 5900 or so. But Larry Lewis's base payrate increased to $197K. Now the comparison is TWENTY percent more money for FIFTY percent less responsibility.

Is it just bad luck RamoneD picked a comparison district that purely by accident happens to make Larry Lewis look overpaid?

Nope.

For the 2007-08 school year:

Cedar Hill reports enrollment of 7867 and paid Horace Williams only $180K

Waxahachie reports enrollment 6561 and paid Tom Collins $134K

Midlothian reports enrollment 6830 and paid Jan Kennedy $166K.

Larry Lewis got paid more than any of them --and accomplished less.

1 month ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

disgusted Anonymous

What happen at the Lancaster / Ennis football game?

1 month ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

disgusted Anonymous

Remone

I hate to be the source of bad news but you do not hear this at the school board meetings both Lancaster High School and Lancaster Middle school failed to meet AYP on the federal level. Lancaster Middle school did not make adequate yearly progress in Math and Reading. The school is in stage 3 if the school does not score higher than 57 on the TAKS Math testfor grades 6-8 and each student group score 50% than the school will be taken over by the state and all teachers and princpals will be fired. Not only the students have to score 57% in Math but also in reading. What troubling most of the math teachers at Lancaster Middle are first year uncertified teachers who are teaching students who do not have the basic foundations in math. Lancaster High school failed to meet adequate yearly progess in Math as well and the school is also in stage 3. In Lancaster Today the principal of Lancaster High School boasted about the fact of replacing 40 teachers. what he failed to mentioned that many of teachers voluntarily resigned. Rolling Hills was on the AYP list in 2006 for failing to score 50% or higher in Math. Rolling Hills was rated unacceptable in 2007 for having low scores in science. Lancaster is in a serious state of disaster. Two schools are on the brink of being closed down. Every year the middle school and high school have high turnover rate among staff because the students are unruly and administration do not make students accountable for learning. Lancaster ISD is desperately in need of new leadership that will make childern accountable for learning

1 month ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

jefmelch Anonymous

Hi Disgusted:

As the resident math geek around these parts, let me assure you teacher turnover rates in Lancaster are decreasing.

That's due to the extreme peak (looks like a deliberate purge) back in the 2003-04 school year.

Bear with me as I construct another table of data:

Turnover Rate for Teachers:
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ District _ _ _ _ State average

2003-04 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 34.90% _ _ _ _ 14.30%
2004-05 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 46.80% _ _ _ _ 16.10%
2005-06 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 24.70% _ _ _ _ 14.60%
2006-07 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 26.70% _ _ _ _ 15.60%

Okay, the first year Dr Lewis arrived, the "turnover" rate among Lancaster teachers was more than double the state average. The next year, it went up even more, to nearly three times the state average. Since then, it's been declining. And the past two years turnover is merely 70% higher (10 or more percentage points higher, depending on how you like your statistics) than average.

But turnover is going down.

To put this into perspective, and make the arithmetic easy, consider that turnover rates of 25% on 400 teachers means there are 100 new teachers every year to get past interviews, do background checks, set up in payroll and retirement, orient by the employee handbook; introduce to principals, etc etc etc.

In consequence the percentage of EXPERIENCED teachers is roughly the reverse. That is, Lancaster is 10 percentage points (or about 70%) lower in the fraction of teachers with 11-20 years of experience compared to the average of all districts all over Texas. Dr Lewis hires younger teachers, and he hires a lot of them every year. But he doesn't keep them long.

These are the facts. In my opinion Dr Lewis's personnel policies resulting, on average, in less experienced teachers in classrooms contributes to the problems in TAKS.

More on Larry, and Marcus Knight, here:

http://www.pegasusnews.com/news/2008/...

1 month ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )