There are two concerns I have..Maybe someone reading this article can help. Besides a retrofit of the existing WMS, portables, and the push in this article for a new school, were there other options considered? I do not recall. But additional options include leased space and more feasibly virtual learning.

Virtual learning will address specific space and curriculum deficiencies including the above Science, Spanish, and even language arts middle school courses. From what I have not seen, it appears that ALL the options have not been vetted.

2nd concern is the OVERALL price tag. That is BOTH fixed and operational costs to run the school district. This unfortunately includes the pending teacher contract and the ADDITIONAL cost of that to the tax payer. So as a tax payer, I can't reall y support or not support a bond until I get the FULLY LOADED cost to my wallet.

This comes at a really bad time to the town where the tax payers who are fortunate to still have a job, have effectively lost a significant % of their take home pay due to the Fiscal Cliff mess that increased Federal Witholding. The bigger increase is the cost of healthcare brought on by the Affordable Care Act. Both of these happened this month....

It is unfortunate that the School Board did not follow Mike Jonas's direction and just go for the addition at Middle School to add the much needed space. That at least had a chance to pass. This new school is a continued pipe dream of certain School Board members to build a campus atmosphere on London Bridge Rd, regardless if it make sense or not. At 30 +/- million it is not going to pass and the kids are the ones who will pay. The additional operational cost for a new school will be 600k to 1 million all day long. When I first posed this question to Adam Steel he told me 600k, then when they were on TV it was 200k. If I am not mistaken 500k was recently stated. So what is it? Think about this, New principle, office assistant, nurse, guidance councilor, lunch staff, janitor and a few more I probably missed. The principle alone, with salary / benefits, will cost you 110k +/-. That is just one employee.

This is one of the reasons that the facility committee ended up at an addition at middle school as the best option. Never mind the extra transition we talked about and a million other reason not to build a new school. We spent over a year working on this, with principles, teachers, school board members and architects, only to have it dismissed in a two week period by a new consultant who said building a new school was the way to go. If you remember last year, the "new addition design", which the company produced in two weeks was 26 million and the new school was 24 million. What happened

I went to the first WINS volunteer meeting, with the typical reservations, whoa that seems like a lot of money. I left with an appreciation for the struggles within our district and a clear sense of why the option for a new Middle School is the fiscally responsible option. In grades 1-8 we are 700+ students over capacity. Children are learning in hallways, closets and stairwells. The current “Middle School” lacks science lab and technology curriculum due to space. It is time to educate ourselves, look at the numbers, check out WINS Facebook page and website. This is a tough decision but in the end investing in our children’s education will pay back again and again. There is no doubt, the past 5 years have been a struggle for many people, including my family. In the past two years in Windam we bought our first house, struggled with the stress of job loss, worried when our 20 year old car died, how we would afford another. I cringed waiting for my first 2013 paycheck. An increase in health insurance and end of Social Security Payroll Tax Holiday, decreased my monthly take home by $52. For some that is dinner out, for us that means we will probably continue to shovel our driveway by hand save for that snow blower next year. When the exact numbers come out at the bond hearing on January 11, I will be thinking about the tax effect and what that really means to my family. What is the price we put on education in our town? A Cable bill? Cell Phone? Season Ski Passes?

@keleigh,
I agree that there is an issue with overcrowding in our school system. My kids actually go to WMS and I am shocked at the lack of facilities. That is one of the main reason I volunteered for the committee. The committee spent over a year working on this problem and as I stated in my last post, economically it was a better solution for an addition on the WMS. Some of the detractors were, extra transition, staffing and economics to name a few. Is it truly worth spending an extra 600k to 1 million a year in staffing at a new school when you could save that money by putting an addition of the WMS?

Is the upgrade to the sports field tied to the new school?
I would definetly be in favor of spending some money to finish the sports fields at the high school properly but if it's a package deal I will definetly not be able to support a new school and all the staffing and costs associated with it.

How come voters are never presented with two options for a school fix?
How come it is nothing but that one option of NEW BIG BUCKS school that will work that we have to vote on over and over?
Are we to believe there is no other option at all that is viable?

Keleigh McAllister, to set the record straight, My additional contribution to healthcare and FICA (federal) withholding is a little over $1,200 per month. I have a family of four and have our kids attending Windham schools. I too want the best education more than anyone else. That's 300 bucks less per week....That's more than one dinner out my dear.

My point is that other options need to be vetted and voted on to determine functional and financial ROI.

Leasing

Adding to existing structure

VLACS - Virtual learning for middle school for NH (Other schools use this option for courses not offered in their brick and mortar school)

Voluntary school vouchers to take a small percentage of students and cut them a check to go to a private school.

AREA agreement with other school systems that have shrinkage of students

The point is that the total pupil population of Windham will taper off and we will, at some point in the near future, have the reverse problem. So maybe the prudent option is to go with a temporary solution which in some cases has no capital expense.

VLACS alone can take some of the class size off. I went on the website and found a large quantity of on line coursework. Why hasn't this been vetted by the school board?

http://vlacs.org/index.php?option=com_course&view=course&Itemid=140

As I said, Salem uses this VLACS subscription service for students, as example, wish to take an economics course but is not offered on campus. Wildly successful!!!!

Also, what will be the plan and cost to re-vamp our school security strategy. Sandy Hook changed everything including our interim response to the issue. Where are we at with a plan and actionable items making our schools safer? That too will be at an additional cost. Right?

I attended the School Board meeting when public input was requested and considered and both the phased approach and a new school were discussed. I walked into the meeting in favor of the phased approach, but once I heard about many of the specifics, including the timeline, my mind changed strongly in favor of a new 7/8 school.

From the meeting, it was my understanding that if Phase I passed in 2013, construction of Phase I could be completed in 2014-2015. This would bring us the tech ed classrooms and science labs. There would be major disruptions of learning due to the construction and would not impact WCS or GBS in terms of relief from over crowding.

Then, if we waited two years to allow for the HS high water mark/bond fatigue, then we could TRY to pass the bond for Phase II in 2017. Phase II construction completion was predicted for 2018-2019. Therefore, it would be 2018 or 2019 before there would be adequate space to relieve overcrowding pressures at WCS and GBS. To me, that is way too long to wait for relief from our current classroom conditions.

If the new school passes, all grades could see relief, return of art/music rooms, etc as early as Jan of 2015 (or even sooner) instead of all of the waiting until 2018-2019 thru the phased approach.

You can easily understand the Tax Impact of this decision. There are 3 main factors at play:

* Town Valuation ($2.04 Billion today)

* Bond Amount ($31M; Years; Interest Rate)

* Operating Cost of the Building (Estimated @ $931K annually which includes 5 new Teachers BTW)

The math to figure out the Tax Rate is simply this:
Annual Amount / (Valuation/1,000) = Tax Rate

For example:
There are all sorts of Bond scenarios but most often you pay a Principal + Interest. As the Principal is paid off the Interest gets lower and thus the total payment is lower. The School can also defer up to 2 years of Principal which I believe is the plan. Basically, you pay more in the beginning than you do later.

The big IF in this equation is the total Town Valuation. If it jumps up considerably the impact goes down, likewise if it drops considerably, it goes up. For this example, I held it the same as today for the next 25 years.

Using these Bond assumptions, this is around what this new school will cost. $31M, 25yr Bond @ 4% + $931K in Operating Costs to run the school:

Year 1 and Year 2: $0.61 (Bond Interest Only) + $0.46 Operating = $1.06 / $1,000 assessed valuation of your home. For $350K that's $212.54.

Year 3 (highest) = $1.27 (P&I) + $0.46 Operating = $1.72 / $1,000 = $443.55 on a $350K home.

Year 25 (lowest) = $1.14 or $240.26

So annually it will cost somewhere between $240.26 - $443.55 to build this school. That's with these assumptions

better yet why don't we build one large school kindergarten thru 8th as a lot of people in the boston area are use too, sell the other properties and send out some pink slips.if we are going to explore options let's look at the big picture and consider the students and the tax payer's.which i know might be an outdated idea but at least one we should consider .

Amazing about how most of these people have only lived in Windham for a short period of time and they demand a new school. Lets get by with trailers and lets quit playing mind games with classroom size. If you subtract the special needs students with assigned aides in the classroom, we have no overcrowding. We cant afford higher taxes at this time. Why don't you cry babies go after the Planning Board and Zoning Board and get some commercial development in town. Then you can take that additional tax base and build a new school?

A 5th building added to our school system does not have support. Aside from the transitions for the students, additional operating costs will be excessive. It took a year of interacting with voters to pass the high school, which was a necessity since Salem no longer wanted Windham students. There is not enough time for this committee to convince a negative electorate to vote for a new middle school. As Dennis states...the School Board has completely ignored one year of hard work accomplished by the Facilities Committee which recommended additions to current buildings. I am not in favor of the proposed bond for a new middle school and will work against its passage..

this town is supposedly built out and a lot of boomer's exchanged their homes with younger families in the last 5-7 years.the average newengland family stay's in their home 25 years or more, don't fall prey to national stats they don;t apply here..i would hate to be paying for and staffing something we won't need again until it's time to replace.

@ Celia. You are a clown if you think that virtual learning for 12 year olds is appropriate. You seem to have a lot of time to post comments to this board on all manner of subjects - I even remember you saying that Kuster was "done" close to the end of election season. Wrong again. And you are so full of it regarding an additional $1,200/month from implementation of PPACA. Spare me the right-wing BS.

@TonyM Nice comment regarding the newbies. Wonder if the Native Americans had similar thoughts when colonial settlement began in Windham?

We moved here thinking that Windham was a great place to raise our kids, with a growing population of economically-successful families that want to ensure their own kids can take it to the next level. I left Massachusetts b/c their priorities were not my priorities. If I still lived there. my kids would be educated in a trailer so some hack's brother-in-law could have a fully funded pension. You want them to be educated in a trailer here because you've already raised your kids here and think "I got mine".

No apologizes from this space. I want to provide my kids with opportunity that I didn't have growing up in an urban setting - and if that costs an extra $250 a year I consider that a bargain. And I've got news for you - there's more of us moving here every day.

Hi all, I know this is an emotional topic but please refrain from calling other users names. That is strictly against our Terms of Use.

Celia
Thank you for adding to the discussion. I would like to add a couple of additional comments regarding VLACS
I think it is a great idea. However, I have not only have taken online classes but have also taught online classes and not everyone can learn in this environment. I would actually rate online learning as advanced independent studying. With this said, I feel that is does have its place and it can be useful.
Second is that classes from 1-8 have been compromised due to the overcrowding and having students in the middle school take VLACS will not solve the overcrowding in the lower grades.
Third commit is that courses like tech ed and science labs are extremely difficult to teach online if not impossible. These are the courses that are lacking at the middle school which is preventing WMS from being an approved Middle School (currently it is approved as an advanced grade school). By the way, I taught technical online courses and it is very very difficult but again, I feel it has a place but do not feel it will solve the overcrowding from grades 1-8.

I appreciate the dialogue. What I find most interesting is that most, if not all of us agree that our schools are overcrowded, and the problem needs to be addressed. The question is, “How do we fix it?”… The school board came up with this solution based on extensive research and voter input. The crowding is getting worse, and the solution continues to increase in price. Construction costs and interest rates will go up. Can we all stop bickering, and remember this is for our children, and community? We need to work together and support the educational needs of the children and build a solid foundation for the future of our town.

@M Saklad,,
The SB did not do extensive research to come up with this solution. They took a years worth of research and dismissed it for their grand plan on LBR.

Dennis
From the timeframe the Final Master Plan Facility Committee Report was presented in June 2011 to the time when the additional options were presented (Oct 2012) was over a year. From what I understand, during that time the school board was posed some questions and they did some additional work and presented several options to the community. In addition, their were several individuals on that committee that are current school board members so it would seem to me that they are pretty informed about the results of the advisory committee recommendations along with the current work to come up with the best and most cost effective solution.

It does not seem reasonable to carry five schools and all the resources needed to keep these operational.I would like to see the taxpayers get something back and maybe have some more upfront costs but remove one or two of the existing schools and combine and remove jobs that are not needed with having them operate out of one building.
I think there needs to be a little more out of the box type thinking here that has something for everybody including people without schoolage children.
For me it can't just be we need a new school so let's build it.
If this school is built I feel it will only be a matter of time before people are pushing for a new elementary school just to keep up with the other two because are old rundown elementary school just doesn't have the facilities are middle and high school have.
I also have children in gbs and center school and yes it is a shame it is overcrowded but I have hit the wall with the tax situation here in town and I feel like it has to stop.
In the last ten years my taxes have more than doubled.I have no clue how I will be able to afford living in this town if that same trend continues over the next ten years.

Nate
Removal of schools is not an option unless you build a larger school which would mean even higher taxes. From what I understand, for the capital expenditure, the school board is working a plan that we will not exceed our current high water mark in taxes which was FY12 and which I think will occur around 2016 and then decrease (with a decrease from Fy12 to FY16 too). There will be more information released soon. If you have not taken a look, I would suggest you look at the facility discussion presentation which oulined the options (http://www.windhamsd.org/schbdinfo/WSB%20Facilities%20Discussion%2011-5-2012.pdf). As for a new elementary school, from what I heard both elementary schools are solidly constructed and have a lot of life left in them.

Jay
Please go back and reread my sentence. " Removal of schools is not an option unless you build a larger school which would mean even higher taxes. " You missed the "Removal of school" statement which means if you eliminate (e.g. GBS), you would not only need space to house all of the GBS students but more space to take care of the overcrowding.

I would tend to disagree about adding a wing to the HS. You will most likely not have the HS staff, beyond janitors, also administer the middle school students. In addition, you would not want the middle school students with the high school students during lunch so even more building and staff. At the end of the day, building a wing on the HS may cost just as much as a new middle school. This is going on the assumption that there is room next to the HS to support additional a wing, additional parking and sports fields.

"“Currently six teams are using a grass field and by overuse, the conditions are unfavorable and unsafe,” Saklad said. “If we have a better field, we can host championship games that bring money to the sports teams.”

I realize that some don't know of the previous proposal to build the stadium. Turf fields are not "maintenance free" and have a lifetime in which there is an additional large cost for replacement. The justification is only made when you start looking at "how many times" the surface can be used within a day/week/etc. The only justifiable cost model has to include lighting (which the previous proposal did not include) and to use it for 'rentals'/'tournaments'/'camps' you additionally needed stands/seating (not in the previous proposal). What we are finding out now is that although a track WAS included in the previous proposal to rally more support, we find out that the track WONT fit around the existing field in the current proposal to be turfed, lit and with stands. This limits the type of rentals/meets that you can bring in. Having run high school concessions at events that have about 15k+ spectators you have to sell a whole lot of hotdogs and coke for these games to come close to bringing in a significant amount of money. It is the rental business that offsets these programs/justifies cost.

Kevin,
I have read that report you linked many times and it does absolutely nothing to make me think any different on this issue.The new school just from looking at the diagrams doesn't even appear to have more classrooms than the current school.
Yes removal of schools is an option and should be considered in the future if we are trying to be fiscally responsible as noted in that report.
In the report we are going to need another 13 million to renovate GBS and add a sixth grade at the new school.
Yes the cost of building a bigger school will be more but can these costs be offset by housing everything under 3 roofs?
Just as an example remove WMS and Golden Brook.
Put K-2 at Center school 3-8 at a new school.Sell the land off that gbs and wms sit on.Your administration and operational costs would go down.Without knowing these figures I can only guess that these would be substantial savings.
Not that I think this is the best idea but something like this needs to be thought out and given consideration.Personally I want something that is thinking of the whole future hear and not have to deal with more band-aids every few years.

Jay,

Just to clarify…Were you referring to Bedford NH? If so, yes their school district is one of the top school districts in the state. The built a new HS, and a separate 7/8 middle school, just as Windham is proposing. The school is Lurgio Middle School. Look at their test scores on line, very impressive. www.myschoolrankings,com
My friends that live in the community are happy that their overcrowding issues are finally solved, with an amazing end-result. The town is very happy with their decision, and now that the bond is decreasing, their tax rates are lower than many other communities in NH.

Jay, respectively, I did not “google search” the school, as I too have a friend in Bedford. After reading my quick response, I realize that I was not clear .Yes, the schools have a “shared core”. The schools are considered separate. Their core consists of shared kitchen, but they each have their own cafeteria.The middle school, and high school gym back up to each other so it can be one gym. Bedford did a good job convincing their voters that their overcrowding was not a “bubble”. It would have been nice to have the ability to save money, and build our schools at the same time, but it is too late.The core of WHS does not support this type of facility. It was difficult enough to convince voters to approve WHS, the added cost of this type of facility would have been defined as “Elaborate”, or a “Taj Mahal”. The problem is many are penny wise, but pound foolish. Bedford schools were overcrowded by 256 students when they passed their middle school. We are overcrowded by 741, and people in Windham are still claiming it is a bubble. It is the same story all over again. Bond rates are at record lows, and builders are hungry. Fact, our schools are overcrowded, the town needs to do something, are you suggesting we wait a few more years for construction rates to rise, and bond rates to increase, and ten build the school foe significatly more I agree it’s too bad. Lesson learned, do it right the first time.

Also, we agree on another point, test scores are starting to fail at WHS, I know, I have a student there. A couple of the teachers have told me that the students’ aren’t able to keep up with the WHS curriculum, especially in Science. The lack of Science labs and instruction is affecting our students. When our students attended SHS our town offered enrichment, world languages, and students had the opportunity to go to an art, and music room, and reap the benefits of the unified arts. Our overcrowding in the middle school is so severe that we have lost enrichment, and they are not even offered a technology curriculum, and you’re surprised by the falling test scores? Great point, our problem is starting to hurt our children.

@Jay

Seriously go to the NH DOE and look up Accountability stats. Art and Music are about exploration and expressions of creativeness. Think those are relevant in Science? Think Math is critical in Science.

Before shooting from the hip and say they're appropriately testing in the lower grades look at the data:

GBS: SINI Year 1 in Reading and Math
WCS: SINI Year 3 in Reading and Year 2 in Math
WMS: SINI Year 2 in Reading and New SINI in Math

In this case the "stuff" flows uphill and these kids are not being prepared to achieve in High School nor beyond.

@GrassisGreener,

I will look at the test scores as I admittedly have not in a year.

I was surprised that dramatic improvements in the WHS testing did not appear as previously 'promised' with all the investment done there as much as I agree that there needs to be added capacity that has been ignored at the same time we build more than enough (wasted) capacity at WHS. Take a look at all the 'district wide' capacity reports from the past 3-4 years. Why do they neglect to include any WHS space?

The point of my rebuttal is that returning labs to the middle school, removing cart teaching as well as Bedford having an independent building are all falsehoods that are being presented as reasons why we need to build a new middle school. Also the 700 figure is a falsehood IF someone spends the time to look at the 3-4 iterations of capacity studies that we paid for and understood how that number is derived.

Now the reason WHS students don't do well in the standard testing is because they were exposed to the same environment that has existed here for a decade? A school environment where people flock to the town to buy property? The carts have been here and in other communities for years. The labs have not existed and the same experiments were performed in the same manner when my children were in the middle school and a Bedford parent can drop off their highschool student and middle schooler at the same stop.

@Jay

Ran out of space. I think it would be absolutely great if the School Board had the cajones to restore all Core space in our Elementary Schools and WMS to their rightful purpose. Being a bit facetious but it would certainly magnify the situation and make it this Capacity discussion crystal clear. No more hallways, no more carts. Also, restore all of the curriculum that's been cut such as Enrichment, World Language, etc. Give the Unified Arts their rooms back too. Then fill the Regular Education classes last. How many kids do you think we'd have per class then?

Do that and say "this is how we're going to operate going forward." Don't get rid of teachers just add another in the rooms we have available. It'll keep the class size down and the learning environment would be perfect (sarcasm).

Different perspective but the core issue is still the same. Too many kids, not enough rooms.

@GrassisGreener,

It seems your shooting from the hip now, don't realize the history of the capacity studies, the 180 degree direction the SB has taken on the unified/unanimous recommendation from the building committee that the town people funded and appropriated engineering funds to develop the facitilities plan.

I'd look back on school budget increases, warrant articles approved/rejected and what programming was in place, in what form, and when. To say that carted programs in grade schools are the reason for WHS doing poor in science is humorous at best when those same programs were in place when Windham (as well as the average of Windham/Salem) performed better in what was sold as an inferior environment.

As for core vs educational space - if you go back and look at the logic for the segmenting of core/educational space you will find that WMS has a core approaching 700 students, but needs more educational space, from memory about 15 classrooms. So we are building a new school, what are the operational costs of that 5th school?

Please do a search in windham.patch.com and you will find a blog by a committee member that dives in and the difference between core and educational space and the debate that went on last year.

Has this been discussed: RE new state school building funding:
"The new system for School Building Aid will become effective in Fiscal Year 2014 which begins on July 1, 2013. The moratorium for votes by the legislative body continues through June 30, 2013. Districts that vote to approve a project prior to July 1, 2013 will not be eligible to receive School Building Aid for that project."

It is difficult for me to agree to raising taxes for a lot of things but our kids deserve normal sized class rooms with labs and a normal teach ratio. They deserve more than what they have currently. Operational costs, life span of artificial turf. Who are you all kidding? Do what's right for the kids. As towns grow we take on more tax revenue and we need to use that for the Police, Fire departments and most importantly the schools for OUR Children whether you have them or not it is your duty as a tax payer to pay. I am not sure how anyone can argue with doing something that will help our chilrden. Mr Senibaldi what you are taking about may be true and your facts may even be accurate but we voted for the SB and doing what's right is what we expect from our SB. What's wrong with this proposal? How can you argue that we do not need more space for our kids and our athletic fields are a mess? It can't be argued, I have two children that won't see the new 7th or 8th grade school and I have two that will. I am voting yes because I got to see what my kids dealt with at the Golden Brook. My two youngest spent time in trailers. I can't even tell people I know that I live in this so called "wealthy town" and my kids are in trailors. Think about what your true intensions are for voting no. Hope you sleep well at night. I think all of the town board should carefully review their stance on this. This is an emotional cause and people are not going to forget.

Nickjo,

Let me translate what you just said. I have 4 child and $64,000+ is spent on their education today. How can you sleep at night knowing that I'm only asking you to spend $1000 more a year in taxes. Your complicating things with operational costs and saying that artificial turf is expensive and it not free to maintain. Do what is right for my kids and just vote yes.

People are not debating that the town's schools needs more space. We voted for the SB to put something on the ballot that would get passed and be in line with improving the school systems.

What they have done is put something on that I don't believe will get passed, was not in line with what had more support and *forgive me* had less of an impact on taxes for the town.

Where we agree is on your last statement - "this is an emotional cause and people don't forget." Take this from a HUGE supporter of a new high school...the "town" made that a mess to the point that it cost more to build and operate that ever expected or portrayed to the public. Do I believe what has been put on the table now by a relatively small group of people? I believe that we need more capacity and improve the schools in the lower grades and think the SB has done an "end around".

Here is the problem with political issues Jay. In order for us to get things done we need to give and take. You seem to think your solution is right and the only solution. We elected the SB to get things done and I believe they put together a plan that would be acceptable to more people. That majority clearly doesn't include you but it should. let's get this done sooner not later. We could debate issues over and over but in the end we vote for results. Cost less now then it will if we wait. I can show you projected cost of money. It never gets cheaper.

Jay
How can you argue that it is not going to be less expensive? Look at charts on realestate appreciation. We are at rock bottom and unless you're one of those fear mogers who is expecting the next great depression. Since real estate has been measured realestate appreciation has shown a 5% return. It has to go up and will go up. So will interest. All waiting is going to do is delay this vote another year with the possability of that vote getting squashed, then the next year and the year after that. We can wait and then we become like Pelham with our children in unaccredited schools doing their work out of trailers. I am willing to take the risk for the good of my children. I do not have a crystal ball but neither do you or any of the people on your side of the fense. Answer the question??? What will waiting do except stall the enevitable? Quick fixes will add up over time also. Go into your crystal ball and let all of us know.

I know windham is the only town in nh that had any population growth but we can't afford to hire all the laid off teachers in the state.enough is enough,windham has another school that needs to be replaced shortly let's look at the whole picture.my child changing schools 5 times is an outrage. if the cost of an addition on center school was twice the cost than building a new two year school.it would still be far more cost effective in a short time.
you people are so good at doing future projections why don't you do one based on salaries, pensions and benefits.
By the way my child has and has had 23 students in her 5th grade center school class all year not 30.

The average size class for 5th grade is 23.3, some classes have more and some have less; it depends on the makeup of the class. (Where did the number 30 come from?) Windham has done everything we can to have kept the numbers as low as we could, which is why we put classes on carts and use non-classroom space. We have run out of non-classroom space, unless we want to use the gym and cafeteria. So, we are going to see class sizes continually increase as we get more students every year, we are out of space to exploit.

According to US statistics federal spending for K-12 education has increased from $12.5 billion in 1965 to $72.8 billion in 2008, measured in constant 2008 dollars (http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2009/2009020.pdf). Total U.S. education spending in inflation-adjusted dollars has tripled since 1950, meanwhile our standings in global education continue to drop.

As of 2010 China has an average of 38 students per classroom in public schools and 42 students per classroom in private schools, these figures are unchanged from 2000. The average U.S. class size in 2010 was 20, a 9% reduction from 2000 (http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/eag_highlights-2012-25-en). The 2009 PISA study conducted by OECD, reported that fifteen-year-olds in the U.S. ranked 25th among peers from 34 countries on a math test and scored in the middle in science and reading. Who came out on top? China of course!

The question begs to be asked, why, with all the money we spend as a country on education, are we continually losing ground compared to the rest of the world? Is it our facilities? Students per classroom? Have parents given up? Are the teachers just in it for the summers off? The obvious answer to all these questions is NO. Windham has some of the most dedicated teachers around, and the parents are certainly not giving up as shown by the passionate and well organized effort by Windham WINS.

continued in followig post

There are many contributing factors to the national decline in education that could be debated, but the one factor you can’t debate is CLASS SIZE. If China is capable of providing the best education in the world with double the class size of what we have in Windham, one cannot, with a straight face say that we are over capacity.

In conclusion, I think it’s time, we as a community, take the gloves off and start asking the difficult questions of how best to deliver education rather than where to deliver education. We need to put political correctness aside and not be afraid to ruffle a few feathers, even if it means not being the ‘popular kid in class’.

how long before we have 12 schools and more staff than students?.
with zoning changes any where from 200 to 400 new homes can be squeezed into windham at .less than 1 child per household taken from the economic peak and the average new england familly stays in their home 25 years what are we going to do until the next generation grows up rent office space..

again as samual clemens once said; there are three types of liars in the world;
a liar
a god dam liar
and statistics
when they start flying in every direction ,duck, get out of the way and come back and play another day. vote no.