Thurgood Marshall graduation 2012
Badin vs. Versailles
Law Enforcement Memorial Day
Dayton Daily News education reporter Scott Elliott writes about schools, kids, teaching and learning.
Home > Blogs > Get on the Bus > Archives > 2008 > January > 22 > Entry
What a new school means to the kids
(Thurgood Marshall High School students file through the rotunda on the way to lunch.)
Last week I wrote about the real, undeniable value an old school has to its community. At the “closing ceremony” for Colonel White High School, we saw how much a school truly is a part of a million personal histories in a community and how those individuals see the bricks-and-mortar structure as important to the character of the neighborhood and city.
Today, we see the other side of the story — what a new school can mean for the kids who go there to learn.
Overall, I could find no kids while visiting the new Thurgoood Marshall High School who had any sentimental sorrow about leaving the old Colonel White. Top student Adrienne Fairbanks summed up the feelings of her classmates nicely as she described the academic and attitude benefits of attending high school in a state-of-the-art building.
The new school offers technology and flexibility, she said, that made it easier to comprehend the work in her math class. A new school built in an orderly, planned way eliminates excuses for being late to class and new security features made Fairbanks feel safer at school.
More importantly, Fairbanks and others told me they felt an old school building forced teachers and students to think and work “the old way.” Whereas the new building gives them modern tools and infuses new college-like learning spirit into the classrooms.
So that was the students’ take at Thurgood Marshall on my visit last week. I’ll start the discussion by saying both points of view have validity — the students who want a modern place to learn and the community folks who want to preserve their history. That’s what makes this a tough problem.
Ideally, old schools might be saved but used for other purposes, not as schools, going forward. The problem is a lack of money and re-use options for so many old schools. Ultimately, a lack of resources is forcing these tough choices.
What is your reaction to the differing points of view of today’s Marshall students vs. graduates of Colonel White?
To view the Thurgood Marshall High School floor plan, go here.
(Image credit: Ty Greenlees, DDN)
Permalink | Comments (11) | Categories: School Construction
Comments
By CRISP
January 25, 2008 10:18 AM | Link to this
Oldprof, again you have your opinions and I happen to disagree. Many people in my neighborhood are unhappy about the current plan for Wilbur Wright. You have a new school in your neighborhood and if everyone is happy with it great. I happen to think the new Cleveland has no character compared to the old school, but again that is my opinion. To suggest that anyone in the community is not welcome at any time to make a suggestion or voice their concerns to the school board is very troubling. I thought they were elected by the people and wanted to hear from the voters, obviously you feel otherwise.By Oldprof
January 23, 2008 10:53 PM | Link to this
Crisp, if we are to delay making decisions and progress until you latecomers can be satsified you were included, nothing ever will be accomplished. Stivers was renovated because its alumni raised the necessary funds—if you want to save your derilect, go out and drum up several million to subsidize the effort. Otherwise, please excuse the rest of us from paying for what you personally want.By crisp
January 23, 2008 3:13 PM | Link to this
DPS parent, I don’t agree with your viewpoint. The “save the buildings, who cares about kids” quote is way past ridiculous. Enough said……..By DPSParent
January 23, 2008 11:16 AM | Link to this
Ms. Crisp I saw the WW meeting on TV… The presenter only showed the New construction at Stebbins… Again the ONLY thing that was saved at Stebbins was the newer Gym area. The rest of the building was torn down and replaced. Call Stebbins they will be glad to give you a tour. As for Stivers I have not seen the powerpoint on costs. I bet it was prepared by the “Save the buildings… Who cares about the kids” folks. I think you ARE entitled to your opinion, just dont complain after the decisions have been made and you did not give your input.By crisp
January 23, 2008 10:12 AM | Link to this
I feel everyone has a right to their opinion. It certainly sounds a bit narrow minded to say that anyone who didn’t attend a certain meeting doesn’t have a right to input on the building or renovation of schools. I believe there was a power point message after the renovated Stivers opened that said the renovated portion was cheaper by the sq. foot costing the taxpayers less money. I was at a school board meeting in September held at Wilbur Wright where there was a slide presentation showing the renovation of Stebbins. Quite impressive. I want children to have the latest in technology, I have grandchildren in the Dayton School system. I just believe we can have that without tearing down a beautiful old building and ruining the looks of an entire neighborhood.By Mary
January 23, 2008 7:31 AM | Link to this
Beautiful rotunda. Hope it does not leak like the average skylight in homes.By DPSParent
January 22, 2008 7:41 PM | Link to this
and by the way Ms. Crisp I attended the meetings that were held pre- Construction…. The meeting I attended was at Belmont and overwhelmingly the people said BUILD NEW!! We were even asked what about preservation the people said save Stivers, but build NEW otherwise…. The question is where were YOU, Mr. Lacey and the other “save my building” people???? I know you all forgot… or did not get the message…. My kids were not even in school yet, I saw it in the paper and came out…..!!!!By DPSParent
January 22, 2008 7:34 PM | Link to this
Ms. Crisp…. Stebbins tore down all of the existing building except for the NEWER athletic center……. Why save buildings that are old just so a select few can drive by and say I once went to school there…. True I have not been in the building in 25 years… but it was good enough then!!!!! I voted for NEW BUILDINGS NOT REHAB!!!! DON”T WASTE MY TAX MONEY!!!!By Skeptic
January 22, 2008 5:05 PM | Link to this
Kudos to Scott as always for showing both sides of the story in a meaningful way. These are the tough choices that we face as a community. In the end, we must make intelligent decisions based on the knowledge and RESOURCES available to us. In a time of tight budgets, unconstitutional state education funding, and continued suburban sprawl, we can expect that the rehabilitation of old buildings will only become more diffcult. The good news is that these kids have a great new school in which to learn!By Eve
January 22, 2008 4:29 PM | Link to this
I’m a little confused about the reference to Stebbins as a renovated high school. Is that not an entirely new structure except for the gym?By CRISP
January 22, 2008 12:37 PM | Link to this
Why do people think if you have a renovated school that you won’t have the latest in technology? Do they assume those of us who favor renovation are considering slapping a coat of paint on the walls and calling it a day? Look at Stivers or at Stebbins in the Mad River district, both beautiful examples of how renovation can work. I think children need to stay current and have every advantage available to them but that can and does happen in older buildings. To my knowledge, Oakwood doesn’t have plans to tear down their high school. I don’t think their students have suffered by going in to an older building. Sixty years from now the new Thurgood Marshall will be junk and I bet Wilbur Wright would still be standing. Built to last or built to crumble in a relatively few years??? I’ll take built to last…..