MgoRayO3313

July 22nd, 2015 at 7:28 AM ^

It's true, and from everything I hear it's likely happening. Crazy to think but the numbers have dropped. Harrison has changed a bit but IMO it's still a solid school.

IMO the major current rift in lower Oakland county seems to be the staunch differences in essentially 'what to specialize in' as a district. My district is one of the last to be a closed district in the area. All districts to the south, east and west are all open enrollment. If you get into our district K-2nd you are often grandfathered in. However, we preach high academics and the arts to death. We (football program) are constantly battling other programs and the band for #s. I feel we are holding our own given our situation. Many top student athletes will not come to us even if they live in district because there are more established athletic programs at our neighboring schools. We (as a district) do absolutely no catering to athletics. But our band will boast 240+ kids.

From a business standpoint we are currently in a solid situation compared to others. But a day is coming where this will likely change. We have our prestigious academic standing for now, but if we were to lose that or the arts who knows what would happen. The whole situation is frustrating on all ends. Rough when you only cater to one type of student.




Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

Seth

July 21st, 2015 at 10:55 PM ^

I live in the Harrison district; most of the families in our neighborhood send their kids to North already. Harrison's football program is great, but you can move a football program pretty easily. As for a dilapitated building that looks more like a prison...

Magnus

July 21st, 2015 at 11:37 PM ^

I'm guessing that if we took a poll, a large percentage of people reading this site went to a high school that "looks like a prison." And many schools are dilapidated. Any building that's more than 15-20 years old is probably going to look a little dilapidated unless it's constantly maintained by a steady flow of money, which is not in the cards for most schools. Ultimately, kids can still learn in a school that's not a state-of-the-art facility.

Seth

July 22nd, 2015 at 12:03 AM ^

I'm not advocating. I'm trying to explain what's going on in my community.

We have half as many kids as when all four schools were built, and one routinely has the air conditioning break down and leaks all the time. We pay out the nose in taxes for school bonds to make sure our schools have a huge flow of money, but we've been falling behind Birmingham and Bloomfield Hills lately even though we all do the bond thing to pay for public schools that equate to private schools. That's because they've downsized. BH went to one high school. Birmingham renovated both schools and sold off a big chunk of Groves (my alma mater) to be a Michigan State satellite. The competition for young families in these burbs is fierce and school quality is #1 on the list. So that's why this is coming up.

Like anywhere in the Midwest there are some poorer and some richer neighborhoods, but on the whole we're talking about a pretty affluent, education-obsessed suburban community that built for the baby boom and has been a bit oversized ever since that ended.

There's a social component, since over time the schools have tended to become somewhat racially and economically segregated. When we do inevitably downsize to three schools, I imagine it will be a good opportunity to undo that.

James Burrill Angell

July 22nd, 2015 at 10:18 AM ^

I live in FH but the North Farmington district. Essentially they'll just merge Harrison and Farmington High. Herrington (the Harrison coach) is at retirement age. A lot of the football players at Harrison are school-of-choicing in from Southfield or their parents rent apartments in those complexs right next the school. Likely means that the team shoppers go elsewhere, the good athletes go to Farmington and the good students end up at North.

True Blue Grit

July 22nd, 2015 at 11:52 AM ^

Bloomfield Hills district has been shrinking for years - especially after the Baby Boomers (like me) all got through there.  Andover has been bulldozed and a new combined high school will open up this fall.  My old elementary was closed as a public school many years ago.  Many of these suburban Detroit districts have gone through this downsizing, especially as local populations have aged and no longer have kids in school.  The BH district is relatively well off since the property tax base is still pretty high.  But even then, older residents who may be retired are often very reticent about voting for millage increases for expensive new schools. 

Bando Calrissian

July 22nd, 2015 at 11:31 AM ^

I don't disagree with the buik of your post here. But I think if you've ever been inside Harrison, you'd see that there are some schools that actually do look like a prison, rather than just feel like one. And Harrison is one of them. Not saying that's a reason to close or replace it, but aesthetically, it's not the most conventional educational building I've ever seen.

Magnus

July 22nd, 2015 at 12:21 PM ^

I'm not speaking metaphorically. Again, I think a large percentage of people went to high schools that "look like a prison." It is a common comment/complaint I've heard, and I - like many others - have visited lots and lots of high schools. The picture of FHH looks like thousands of other schools across the country.

snarling wolverine

July 22nd, 2015 at 12:35 PM ^

I've got to agree with the others here.   Yes, there are "prison" aspects to other large old school buildings, but it stands out more at Harrison than any other school I can think of.  Actually, when my high school went there for a game back in the '90s,  the rumor was that it was a former prison.

 

Magnus

July 22nd, 2015 at 4:32 PM ^

LOL. The architectural structure of FHH has no bearing on me, my family, etc. I'm just involved in a discussion. I stated something, people have responded, and the discourse continues.

Again, your description (about lack of windows, etc.) is not unique. I'm not talking about FHH itself and saying it doesn't look like a prison. I'm saying lots of other schools look like prisons, too.

I guess this is a point of pride amonst people from the area? Some of you seem to be really entrenched in this idea that FHH is like a prison, and other people (like me) just don't understand how prisony the prison looks like a prison, regardless of whether we have our own experiences with prisony prisons.

So I will walk away from the conversation. Your prison is the prisoniest.

1989 UM GRAD

July 21st, 2015 at 11:33 PM ^

Harrison grad here. Been many years so I can't speak to the quality of the school or the situation in FH. I don't have overwhelmingly fond memories of high school but it would be sad to see one of the great HS football programs go away.

softshoes

July 22nd, 2015 at 1:30 AM ^

I graduated from Farmington High. My parent's house was about mid way between FHS and Harrison and my younger brother was offered the choice of going to either. He was in the first graduating class. When Harrison first opened I can say that it didn't remind anyone of a prison. I would suppose though that it may be showing it's age by now.

Qmatic

July 22nd, 2015 at 2:19 AM ^

Same situation as my hometown of Warren. While Warren has gone through some extremely rough times in the past two decades, I can see the same issues trickling out to other suburbs. The high school I attended (Tower) now has half the amount of students the building was built for. Less families moving into the are, coupled with the fact that generally families are smaller, have led to cities and school districts faced with this problem.




Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

LSAClassOf2000

July 22nd, 2015 at 7:00 AM ^

The districts where I attended school (Northville and then Saline) have seen their fair share of changes, but the one where I currently live and where my kids go (Romulus) has seen a lot of tough choices made too. In the eleven years we've lived here, three elementary schools - including the one that would have been the neighborhood school for us - have shut down and the only real infusion it has had in terms of student population / funding is when they took on a portion of the now-defunct Inkster School District. Couple that with the fact that a lot of my neighbors are older families and empty nesters now and it's hard to see this turning around soon. 

Hail-Storm

July 22nd, 2015 at 10:00 AM ^

I grew up in Holland and the area was growing like crazy in the 90s.  Zeeleand (next town over) built a brand new school that was too small by the time it was done. My school district built a brand new 8-9 building because we were too large for 4 grades in the HS and now have a brand new HS, with the old HS becoming a second middle school. So two High Schools and two Middle Schools. 

As a new parent, trying to pick places to live based on school districts is a lot tougher than I thought it would be. 

MaizenBlueRounder

July 22nd, 2015 at 2:41 AM ^

Several laws have been changed that affect the schools and no one seems to mention those.  



1. The law passed giving public funding to private schools for parents who choose to send their kids there.

2. School of choice.

3. The increased number of charter schools compeating for enrollment. (Not sure if a law led to this or not)

 

The Mad Hatter

July 22nd, 2015 at 6:46 AM ^

#1 isn't a thing in Michigan.

#2 is an issue, but mainly for already failing schools and school districts. Why send your kid to the shitty school nearby when they can get a better education one town over at no additional cost? Some of the better districts don't participate in order to keep "those people" out of their schools.

#3 is only an issue in Detroit and other big cities. No charter schools in most suburbs.

MgoRayO3313

July 22nd, 2015 at 6:59 AM ^

I disagree wholeheartedly with tryout last statement. Coaching football in the OAA I know there are many charter schools locally that are directly effecting the population of several of our division opponents. It's no longer just a Detroit thing. Yes the numbers each takes in are typically relatively small. Yes many of those students are kids bused up from Detroit to attend a charter school in the suburbs. But many of those same kids (and local kids who attend) could all be kids that attend Southfield, Southfield-Lathrup, Ferndale, OP, Hazel Park or RO, Madison Heights Madison and Lamphere considering they are all 'open' districts in lower Oakland County. That's not even county Macomb county. Charter schools are growing, I don't really understand why. The most obvious reason being that DPS is so bad.




Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

The Mad Hatter

July 22nd, 2015 at 8:21 AM ^

As you seem to be much better informed about the subject than I am.  I live in Royal Oak and there are no charter schools here (or nearby) that I'm aware of.

Personally I'm not a huge fan of school choice, but my reasons are entirely selfish.  Opening up enrollment to out of district kids has absolutely hurt the academic standings of RO schools.  Ten years ago the elementary school down the block (Upton) was in the top 10 statewide, now I'm not sure if it's even in the top 50.  ROHS is still in the top 50, but just barely.

 

Seth

July 22nd, 2015 at 11:05 AM ^

The charter schools are taking a few students. But the bigger effect is we built for a temporary population disruption.

In the 1960s, 85% (that's ridiculously high) of Bloomfield Hills homes had school-age children. Today that's under 50%. Those numbers were repeated ad nauseum in the local paper/e-newsletter (Patch) during the merging of their high schools.

Farmington won't be exactly like that--iBloomfield Hills was built almost entirely after the war and immediately filled with vets starting families, whereas Farmington was a thriving farming town for a century before it became a suburb. But that illustrates why, despite the population not being as hard hit as most of Michigan, these districts are still downsizing.

A bit of school funding history: up until I was in college (and Engler was governor) your property taxes went right to the school district. Communities like Ann Arbor, Birmingham, Bloomfield Hills, and Farmington voluntarily raised their property taxes to create elite schools. The rule itself though ultimately created an effect of really good schools in affluent areas and awful schools in poor areas, which isn't really fair considering the state should be providing a good education to all of its citizenry. So the state pooled everybody's property taxes into the state fund, shifted half of them to prisons, and doled out the rest evenly. In response these communities started passing regular bonds. Every few elections there's a bond issue on the ballot, everybody winks at each other, and we pass it, and that money can't be touched by the state. But it does raise the price of living here, because paying off the "bonds" is effectually a permanently increased property tax. It means if you're planning on sending your kid to private school, you can save money by buying a house in another suburb.

School choice is a politically charged thing that affects everywhere because there are parents who prefer privitized institutions everywhere. I don't think it's a primary effect in this particular case because the #1 reason people live in Farmington in the first place is the public schools. West Bloomfield is right smack in between Farmington Hills and Bloomfield Hills, but WB has relatively crappy (read: "just pretty good") schools, and far lower taxes because they don't pass school bonds.

MgoRayO3313

July 22nd, 2015 at 11:58 AM ^

You are correct that there are no charters yet in RO. But Ferndale (technically Ferndale Prep), Hazel Park (Merit Academy) Southfield (summit academy and Bradford academy) and a small contingency of others all run in surrounding suburban communities.

All of their respective numbers are fairly low, but the my do tap into the overall numbers.

I also agree with other points that the population, and age demographics have changed and have also 'hurt' the schools. The lack of state funding is rough as well. With schools essentially. being forced to accommodate everyone and putting students in the least restrictive environment to learning, costs most certainly rise




Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

snarling wolverine

July 22nd, 2015 at 12:00 PM ^

Not that there aren't problems related to budget cuts, but this is above all an issue of declining enrollment.  The U.S. population is simply getting older, as people now marry later and have fewer children than they used to.  That is a nationwide trend and holds particularly true for the white population, so if a city is predominantly white it's very likely going to have declining school enrollment even when its population is stable.

It's harder for Farmington to justify having three high schools when its enrollment is considerably lower than it was a generation ago, when they opened.

 

megaswami

July 22nd, 2015 at 7:57 AM ^

We can all thank charter schools. I have a real problem with schools that "profit" off the state voucher system. Kids don't get the best teachers because they are just buying time until they can get a public school job. So turnover rates are high amongst teachers. The schools are not held to the same standards as public schools, although changes are coming. Many politicians sit on charter boards, so pockets are sometimes getting lined. Admins and the companies supporting the schools often make huge salaries/profits because the system of checks/balances is skewed for profit, rather than student success. Not all charters are bad, but do you really want people making money off the backs of your kids?




Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

Natalie_Emcard

July 22nd, 2015 at 9:26 AM ^

Not all charters are created equal. There are certainly SOME charters that do kick out kids and do the wrong thing - but a vast majority do not. Don't let the actions of a few dictate the narrative of many. There are also some district schools that send kids to college vastly underprepared (we complain about it on this board with recruits) but we don't categorically say all district schools fail kids.

Natalie_Emcard

July 22nd, 2015 at 9:17 AM ^

It's actually the large school districts and teachers unions that control the narrative. Charters put pressure on the system to improve, and a lot of the negative spin is coming from those hurt by changing status quo. If school districts were performing well, there would be no need for charters.

HarbaughorBust

July 22nd, 2015 at 9:33 AM ^

How do these large school districts and teacher unions control the narrative?   They are both practically broken and/or broke.   If the teacher union (Or any other union) controlled the narrative, then what happened in Wisconsin would have never taken place.   That argument is getting worn out, especially when approximately only 10% of the workforce belong to a union.    Update your talking point, though why should you, people actually believe it.

What factors are you using in determining if a school district is performing well?



I'm sorry but I have to laugh at the assertion that Charters put pressure on public schools to improve.   If anything, Charter Schools have started a race towards the bottom.   

Natalie_Emcard

July 22nd, 2015 at 9:11 AM ^

I'm not sure you have the right definition of a charter school.



Charter schools are publicly funded, boards are volunteers, and typically operate on 72% of a traditional schools budget. They receive greater autonomy to make decisions for their school in exchange for greater levels of accountability. They typically give families choice where there is none.



They are different entirely from a voucher system.

cobra14

July 22nd, 2015 at 10:02 AM ^

Charter's are an absolute awful alternative to public and and even catholic/private schools. Go ahead send your kids to a Charter and get awful teachers, and an even worse student population. its just another way to break education down to make money off of it. That's the goal.

I'm a teacher and support my Union 100% but we have no rights anymore. Legislation has taken everything away from us so don't point your fingers at the Union. I've just finished my 11th year. I took a pay freeze for 3 years and a huge pay cut each of the last 5 years to "Help my district out" only to have each year spending not to be done properly and another cut coming.

You want to get mad at education get mad at people in charge. You think there are bad teachers blame your principals for that. It's their job to get shitty teachers out. They don't do the job right.