The Herald Bulletin

Afternoon Update

Letters

March 12, 2010

Viewpoint: Former board member recalls history of school reorganization

By Ray Turner

Anderson resident

Thank you, J. Harold Berkshire. In the 10 years serving on the school board I can’t remember being called a gentleman. I don’t recall meeting you during that 10 years and I apologize for that. I became acquainted with most patrons who came to board meetings.

My memory of the happenings when Richland and Union townships became part of the Anderson system is a bit different than yours. The $3 million spent on Highland was fairly accurate but like amounts were spent on Anderson and Madison Heights. I did not recommend the projects as we had building committees to assess the needs in the system. That was a committee recommendation.

You failed to mention that it was a few years after the townships entered the system. Highland was growing in student population and needed space. Anderson and Madison Heights were also in need of space. There were about 5,500 grade 9 through 12 students in the system. The committee recommendations included the assessment that 5,500 students in two buildings would not be a good educational situation. The state board would not approve an addition to the buildings without an integration plan. That was the law of the land. The much needed remodeling was done in the 1975-76 school year as well redistricting the high schools.

You also mentioned that the townships asked to become part of the Anderson system. The state passed legislation in 1959 mandating the reorganization of school systems with fewer than 2,000 students. Madison County had an educational committee that submitted plans to the state. That committee was highly influenced by Anderson. There were four plans for the county schools submitted to the state by that committee. You can find many articles in the newspapers about those plans, the lawsuit and the referendum vote.

Richland and Union townships were part of the old Metropolitan school system at the time. Richland and Union townships had more than 2,000 students and added to that was the rest of the Metropolitan system. By the virtue of the 1959 statute, Metropolitan schools did not need to be reorganized. The committee said they did. There was much political persuasion used to bring the committee’s plan to a referendum. The Metropolitan district buildings had been neglected during those years because the outcome of reorganization was in doubt. Education suffered during the entire process. There is much more to the story and I would be glad to steer you to more information.

I believe in neighborhood schools. Busing five to 10 miles is not neighborhood. I also believe that bigger is not better. Quality education comes at a price, but price does not always produce quality.

Parents have the right and obligation to pursue the best education they can find for their children. Statistics about ISTEP, attendance, graduation rates, expulsions, student population and rating comparisons to all state districts are available. The Anderson system does not place well in those comparisons. I would like all students to succeed.

Schools are for the students. Buildings are tools toward educational goals and not for bragging rights. They should be built accordingly. The larger question is “why are the surrounding school districts growing and Anderson shrinking?” If that question is answered and resolved maybe things will look up for the district.

Feel free to contact me if you would like.

Text Only
Letters
More from The Herald Bulletin
Hyperlocal Search
Premier Guide
Find a business

Walking Fingers
Maps, Menus, Store hours, Coupons, and more...
Premier Guide
Popular Searches
Powered by Local.com