Clevelander17

This could have some possibilities. I favor merit pay and reduced tenure protections because there are definitely people that I know of seriously abusing that system. My sister student-taught for a teacher in Columbus Public Schools who did almost nothing in class to enforce basic discipline, and did even less to actually teach. That waste of space needs to be kicked out and replaced with a younger, cheaper teacher--people keep talking about that like it's a bad thing, but it's not necessarily. Not when there are a fair number of older teachers coasting and making $80k+, while there are talented graduates out there trying to get their feet in the door and willing to work for $40k or less. My sister was one of the lucky ones who at least found a job. She gets fantastic reviews, from everything I hear (and I believe what I hear on this one, because she has the force of personality necessary to manage a room full of middle schoolers--a somewhat rare personality trait). For all that, she is going to be the first one let go in the event of budget cuts, because of the seniority system. Moreover, the inability to tear up collective bargaining contracts increases the likelihood that her job will get axed in order to fund rising benefit costs for the more senior teachers who remain. In regards to the bad teachers issue (which from what I've seen is vastly overstated), this is an administration problem. If this cases exists, which I'm sure they do, then it's the administrators that should be doing more about it. Maybe it should be a bit easier to get rid of bad teacher, but not to the point where it tilts the balance of power so far in the other direction that the highly-paid, good teachers out there can be disposed of at a whim to save money (and this will happen). Or that the fiery, outspoken teacher who also happens to be very good at his job can be dumped because his views at odds with one of his superiors. Again, the merit pay thing would be problematic on a number of levels even if it did work. Unfortunately, there are a number of studies out there that show it does not improve outcomes and actually makes the environment for colleagues more contentious (why in the hell would a good senior teacher mentor a younger teacher who might be in line to take their job; forget about sharing best practices amongst colleagues).

Their anti-residential argument is that it will cost the taxpayers more to service (public safety, garbage collection, etc.) this new area than the amount in new taxes that might come in.

In fairness, First Interstate and those in South Euclid that support the Oakwood development probably don't give a rat's behind about Severance and University Square. This is what a lack of regionalism does. We get more and more retail because the suburbs are all competing against each other, but in the end, everyone loses. South Euclid can't pay its bills so it whores itself out.

Off of the top of my head, I can tell you that Legacy was supposed to be mixed-use. The developers never got to the residential/commercial stage, for whatever reasons (perhaps it was the economy, but still). I guess my point is that things can change and in an area that is already far too over-saturated with retail, this is the best that First Interstate can come up with as far as a development. I don't even want to imagine worst case scenario, but I'm thinking check cashing places and who knows what else. Here's a thought: Why might First Interstate have not tried to put together an office/commercial park?

Excellent point. If you're good in math and science (and you actually now need a degree in these subjects to teach them at the secondary level), why in the heck would you become a teacher when you can make oftentimes at least twice as much out of the gate using your degree in other ways? Not to mention the lack of respect and the abuse that the profession now takes from certain people. It's funny how all of sudden teachers, firefighters, and police officers are overpaid. The thing about these professions is that they offer stable compensation. Ten years ago when the economy was booming people laughed at how "little" these people made knowing the private sector offered so much more. Some of the rhetoric in this whole discussion and debate disgusts me at times.

They torn down Penn Station for this? Great job Welo!

Here's the thing. Whatever they're selling you today is very unlikely to be what you're going to get tomorrow. This is true of any development, but perhaps especially true of First Interstate. They made a lot of promises about Legacy and much of what was drawn up in the original plans never happened. I have a feeling that this is going to pass regardless though. Just a gut intuition.

Honestly, if I lived east of Belvoir and/or north of Mayfield (i.e. far, far away from this potential development), I would probably be voting yes.

Hey, does anyone know what's going on with the historic part of the Huron Hospital building? Is the Cleveland Clinic still using it, or is the health center in a different part of the complex?

I would have been surprised if the PD's endorsement was for a "no" vote. The board endorsed Kasich, after all. I just got back from a fairly fiery City Club debate on this. Interesting forum, although I think that everybody in that room already had their minds made up. Is there video or audio available from the debate? Unfortunately when it comes to the PD, the newspaper ownership seems to have its thumb on the editorial board. This is quite a shame, because I'm not sure the press is supposed to be like that. Anyways, the logic behind the PD's endorsement is faulty. If Issue 2 were to pass, the Republicans would have absolutely no incentive to go back and make adjustments or compromise with anyone. Compromise is most likely to happen if the issue fails.

Yeah, some of the neighborhoods up the "uphill" from Terrace Road near the CH border are unique and really nice. Some of those structures have nice bones, but look like they're in really bad shape.

Whatever happened to the planned shared recreation center between Richmond Heights, South Euclid, and University Heights? About two years ago there was a lot of talk about it (even think it was supposed to be named after the late Congresswoman Stephanie Tubbs-Jones) and now I've heard nothing. What gives? This would have been great for all cities involved and a nice example of regional collaboration.

I think there will be a compromise after Issue 2 fails. The Republicans aren't going to so easily give up on instituting reform, but after a humbling defeat and with a Presidential election cycle next year, they will be less likely to push anywhere near the extreme/politically-motivated changes they tried in SB5. In the end, Ohio will be better off with more balanced reforms.

I love the claim by the pro-96 side that this will come at "no cost" to South Euclid residents.

Hey! They've thrown one pass (for a TD) and they're still going to win this game. I'll take it...

Bradford Road, right where it meets South Taylor. There's another cool house with gigantic pillars like that as you go past Coventry eastbound on Euclid Heights Boulevard.

Haha, wow...

Since 92.3 switched formats there's been a big void on my radio. I would say that 107.3 is pretty decent, they occasionally play some of the indie stuff I like, but sometimes they get weird. I've also found that 88.3 (Baldwin-Wallace) is very solid--when I am able to pick it up on the eastside. I've also discovered that during certain times of the day and in certain parts of the city, my radio picks up 95.9 out of London, Ontario, which also features a more "classic" alternative format (the good stuff from the 90s).

Oh, I know that you didn't say such a thing. I was just pointing out that when merit pay is discussed it usually has to do with introducing the use of standardized test scores to determine compensation. For instance, "merit pay" is a part of SB5, and the language in the bill stipulates that standardized test scores will be used for 50% of how certain teachers (language/math, specifically) are "evaluated."

Sorry, I didn't see that. I also posted it in the dumba$$ list of rankings thread. Maybe this one deserves its own thread? Yeah, I can see some problems with doing that, but there are a lot of areas in which the two can be compared. Regardless, this is just the prototype study.

Not going to comment on this at the moment, I just thought it was interesting and perhaps worth discussing: http://www.heightsobserver.org/read/2011/10/03/prototype-study-ranks-most-livable-neighborhoods-heights-area-comes-out

A lot of these things are already being done and are up for debate on effectiveness. But when people start throwing around the term "merit pay," it's usually code for using standardized test scores to determine pay/bonuses. This is what concerns me. If we're going to go down that road, then we better have an absolute fool-proof system that is at least 95% accurate in measuring what it's supposed to measure. There are great teachers working in urban districts whose students, for various reasons, score terribly on standardized tests. There are average teachers in exurban districts whose students score through the roof. Any system that is going to take into consideration standardized test scores to determine part of a teachers pay better be able to eliminate all extraneous variables and truly be able to show what value the teacher added. Also, I just had to respond to your syllabus comment. If a teacher has found a method that works well and helps the students connect with the material, then who cares if they use it for ten years or more?

That's true. Still don't know if it's worth it in the end.

Which is exactly why I selfishly don't want to see Ohio give huge tax breaks to Sears unless the company is coming to Northeast Ohio.

And how should performance be measured in your opinion?