Report Inappropriate Comments

Teacher:

1) There will not be classrooms with 40+ students - "class size shall not exceed 28 on a weighted basis" (p.23, Section 12-6.4 (A) of Warwick Teachers contract - http://www.warwickschools.org/PDF_Files/WTUContract2012-2014.pdf). There are also several other, specific caps on the number of students allowed in some specific classroom types, including accounting for students with IEPs, etc. Again, this is all in the current teacher's contract and can't/won't be amended w/out the cooperation of the union.

2) RE: long bus times - that is an "only in RI" complaint, sorry. There are kids in districts in the state and across the country who take much longer bus rides and still manage. Perhaps if the aforementioned teacher contract allowed for longer school days (as per section 12-3, secondary schools are capped at 6 hrs 45 minutes and elementary at 6.5 hrs), there would be more flexibility. Though I doubt 7 PM would be an option (and wasn't one even back in the days of double-sessions when Warwick Schools were bursting!).

3) Historical demographics show that nn 2005 there were 1376 students at Pilgrim and 1236 at Toll Gate (http://webmail.warwickschools.org/ltfpcpublicdocs/FOV1-000629E3/October%2017,%202013%20distributed%20material.pdf). With the closure of Vets, let's hypotheticall split those 900 students in half (450 to each of the 2 remaining HS). That would give Pilgrim around 1450 and Toll Gate around 1400. That's roughly an extra 75 students for Pilgrim (say 3 classrooms) and 160 for TG (6 class rooms). I don't think that the demographics in Warwick have changed that much in 8 years. Obviously, as a bigger school building, Pilgrim would probably get more than TG, though. But again, we're hardly reaching back to the Dark Ages of education here.

4) As for your question as to "whether students in Warwick will be able to compete in college with students from other parts of the state" (and your answer of "NO"), well, there are several more factors that go into that performance than the building the kids are in. Teacher quality, parental involvement, curriculum, etc. It's a long list and I'd put the building issue towards the bottom of the list.

5) As for "hectic" environment---again---the population levels will be slightly more than what they were 8 years ago. And there are creative ways to manage student flow in the halls by creating class or group based wings or areas. Or even carrying the "team" concept from Jr. High to High School. There is plenty of room to innovate and opportunities to think outside the box with this reconsolidation if people are willing to engage.

6) Finally, the long term committee was comprised of administrators, parents of current Warwick school kids and I believe more than a few with actual teaching experience. These aren't number crunchers intent on saving money at the "expense" of the kids (including their own!) education. They are trying to deal with a very real problem and have made a recommendation based on information and analysis. Why? Because the funds for educating Warwick kids are limited and the best way to maximize those funds is to reduce infrastructure (buildings, maintenance, utilities). The goal is to take that money and use it for students (and that includes paying teachers more, btw), which is what everyone wants. You may disagree with them, but to suggest that they are not operating in good faith with the best interests of the students in mind is both disengenuous and unfair.

From: On a roll to save Vets High

Please explain the inappropriate content below.