Category: Village of Ridgewood

>
The debate over mathematics curricula is prominent as we vote on April 15th for two seats on the Ridgewood Board of Education (BOE). That’s why I’m voting for Sarah-Kate Maskin and Greg Lois . They are the only two candidates that are flatly against the BOE’s march toward reform math. This march continues even as evidence mounts that reform math curricula including TERC, Everyday Math, and CMP2 are worsening the broken system of mathematics education in the U.S.

Reform math was dealt a major blow in September 2006 when the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) reversed its 1989 call for students to ‘discover’ free-flowing solutions to mathematical problems. Instead, the NCTM called for a return to fluency in basic arithmetic for grades K-5. Yet our BOE responded last year by continuing to tout the 1989 standards, and expanding Everyday Mathematics in our elementary schools, and introducing CMP2 to our middle schools.

Hundreds of Mathematicians have dealt additional blows by signing petitions against reform math. Notable was Alan Greenspan ’s comment in his recent autobiography: “I always wondered how you can learn math unless you have a thorough grounding in the basics and concentrate on a very few subjects at a time. Asking children to use their imagination before they know what they are imagining about seemed vacuous to me.”

Parents who brought these concerns to the BOE were met with condescension.

Greenspan’s view was reinforced in the long-awaited report by President Bush ’s National Mathematics Advisory Panel (NMAP). The report calls for fluency and automatic recall of basic arithmetic in K-5, and for concentration on fewer subjects to allow mastery. But reform curricula in our schools, including TERC, Everyday Math, and CMP2 don’t value or teach fluency, and they quickly skip over many subjects, not allowing time for mastery.

The NMAP report should have dealt the final blow to reform math, but not for the Ridgewood BOE. Instead of honestly comparing current curricula to the NMAP recommendations, they trolled the report for sound-bites that justify their actions.

It’s time for a change in the Ridgewood BOE. That’s why I’m voting for Maskin & Lois. While there are many other issues, curriculum choice is paramount. Votes for Maskin & Lois are against clinging to the pendulum as it swings to the extreme of the next education fad. Votes for Maskin & Lois are for critical thinking and sound curricula.

John G. Sheehan , Ph.D.
Ridgewood

>PJ – Can you please start a new thread on the League of Woman Voters debate, since this thread (about the RW Republican Club “Math Night”) has been hijacked.

Obviously there are many here who want to discuss last nights debate.

thanks!

a comment

You noticed that too?

Did you also see Charlie’s rude behavior?

This is what I saw…

Frances went up to ask a question and arrived slightly behind a questioner (I don’t recall his/her name). She then backed off, giving the questioner some space.

Then, after the questioner finished, Frances moved back up the center aisle to ask her question. At the same time, Hutton rises to ask a question and is making his way through his row of seats to the center aisle.

As this is happening, the moderator announces that this will be “the last question”.

Hutton arrives at the center aisle at the same time that Frances (in the center aisle) arrives at Bob’s row of seats.

There is the smallest microsecond of a pause (probably to avoid crashing into each other) and then Hutton muscles his way in front of Frances and heads to the microphone.

Then as bonus rude behavior, Hutton tries to ask TWO questions and is chastised by the moderator (with whom he trades words in an attempt to ask two questions).

Now clearly, Frances was “next” and should have been the last questioner. First of all, she was already queued up to be the next questioner and even if Hutton didn’t notice this, common courtesy dictates that a person exiting a row of seats, yields to the person in the aisle

Totally rude and totally wrong behavior, but Hutton must be heard! Unfortunately, this is what I have come to expect from Bob Hutton, so this boorish behavior was really not surprising to me.
BTW, Hutton also grandstanded the prior night at the Republican club Math night event where he turned a Q+A session into a soapbox attack diatribe.

But wait, there’s more theater from the self proclaimed guardians of all knowledge…

After Frances got muscled out by Bob Hutton and Bob finished fighting with the moderator and asked his ONE question, Frances went up to the microphone.

The moderator said that that (Hutton) was the last question.
Frances asked if there could be one more question, and before the moderator could even answer, Charlie (you just knew he couldn’t leave this alone) almost bolted out of his seat as he yelled (and I paraphrase, but you will see it when the tape is released) “NO! SHE SAID NO MORE QUESTIONS. THOSE ARE THE RULES”.

Frances might have said something to the moderator. Then someone in the audience yelled out “Let her ask her question”. There was a murmuring of agreement in the audience, but Charlie (looking like the veins were about to pop out of his head) again insisted “NO, THOSE ARE THE RULES”. Then someone yelled out “Well, let’s put it to the audience… lets take a vote” Finally the moderator took back control and allowed “One last question from someone who did not already ask a question.”

Frances was allowed to ask her question.

another comment …..

Goodman showed her true colors saying that she sided with the School Board Association in wanting to take the vote on the budget away from the public. Her comparison to state and federal budgets belies her ignorance of our representative system of government. Schools purposefully are left to “local” control with state and federal mandates to guarantee that an equitable service is provided. State and federal budgets are NOT designed to be local control because they provide for the function of state and federal governing bodies.

How can she not understand that because the budget has to go before the voters, it forces any board of ed to provide ample due diligence to the process, and to make it somewhat transparent. We can improve on this by moving the budget vote to the general election when far more voters go to the polls (a proposal the unions and school board assoc. fight tooth and nail). But if Goodman truly wanted public representation, she would have recommended such a move. Clearly, her sentiments lie towards a “dictatorship” model for a school board. Really scary stuff.

>

>From the report of the National Math Panel: “The sociocultural perspective of Vygotsky has also been influential in education. It characterizes learning as a social induction process through which learners become increasingly independent through the tutelage of more knowledgeable peers and adults. However, its utility in mathematics classrooms and mathematics curricula remains to be scientifically tested.”

>
Over 100 New GeesePeace Volunteers Trained in Ridgewood

GeesePeace founder David Feld and Diana at Village Hall Comunity Center,
demonstrating how to addle eggs following the humane GeesePeace protocol.

Turnout was high at two GeesePeace training sessions held in Ridgewood on March 27. Over 100 volunteers from all over Bergen, Passaic, Hudson and Sussex counties in New Jersey, and Rockland County in New York, attended an afternoon session at Village Hall and an evening session at The Stable.

Ridgewood more than doubled its roster of volunteers, which grew from 16 last year to 35 this year. We certainly have enough people to continue the success we experienced in the Village last year, and expand out to cover our Bergen County parks and golf courses. Diana and Jim are working on assignments week of March 31. Time is of the essence, as we have already discovered and treated one active nest in town.

A big “Thank You” to Captain John LiPuma of the Ridgewood Police Department, who arranged for an officer to assist with parking, particularly at The Stable where the small lot overflowed its capacity quickly.

>Questions for Mayor Pfund and co-consiprators:

1) The local economy is now in the toilet. As a result, parking problems have eased significantly since your 2002 survey was taken. Are you aware of this?

2) Higher fuel prices and huge toll hikes will force more residents into mass transit venues. Thus, more parking will be needed near the train station and at the Route 17 Park & Ride. Do you agree?

3) You couldn’t build Village Hall on time or on budget, so why on earth would you try your hand at building a parking garage?

4) North Walnut Street isn’t the right place for the garage. Traffic flow will be a mess if you put a garage there. Have you asked your Village Engineer for his opinion?

5) Why are you willing to condemn 120 Franklin Avenue, plus lots behind the stores on Oak Street, but you aren’t willing to tell Ken Smith that you’re taking his business?

6) How do you plan to fund this project, estimated in today’s dollars to cost at least $9 million?

7) Why are you building more retail outlets when there are plenty of vacant store fronts already in the CBD?

8) Why only 12 affordable housing units? Isn’t our current COAH obligation significantly higher?

9) No member of the public, repeat NOT ONE TAXPAYER, has stepped forward at a Village Council meeting in support of this ridiculous project. You’ve had several taxpayers speak against it, but ZERO in favor of it. With this in mind, WHY ARE YOU MOVING FORWARD??????????

and added later ….

10) What about the loss of every single parking space in the existing North Walnut Street surface lot, plus several parking spaces on North Walnut Street itself, while the garage is being constructed? Wouldn’t it make more sense to build a new surface lot, or parking deck, at a location where existing spaces would not be lost due to a prolonged building construction project?

11) Councilman Harlow has proclaimed “if we build it, they will come.” Pascack Valley Hospital made the same proclamation about their new building addition. Are you aware of what just happened to Pascack Valley Hospital Mr. Mayor?

>
Nominating Petitions for the May 13, 2008 Municipal Election are available at the Village Clerk’s Office, 131 N. Maple Avenue, 5th Floor between the hours of 9:00 AM and 4:00 PM Monday through Friday.

Please note that all petitions must be filed before 4:00 PM on Thursday, March 20th 2008.

>Some 60 Ridgewood residents and parents attended a public meeting of the Board and district principals last Monday. As advertised by the superintendent in his letter to the parent community, a proposed “plan” was to be articulated for addressing the issues that have led to the intense concerns many parents have expressed with the district’s elementary and middle school math programs.

After listening for an hour and a half as each member of the panel expressed their education philosophy, I was appalled to learn that the highly anticipated plan was to ‘partner with a local university’ so that they could tell us what we needed to do. What disappointed me even more was that there was zero deliberation of this supposed plan from any of the Board Trustees, given the fact that the constructivist math, which is the source of great parental concern, is the very product of the education departments within these local universities.

As was expressed by several speakers at the microphone that evening, the “partner” chosen will likely determine the outcome of what math program is implemented at our six elementary schools. If, as is expected, the university supports reform math and constructivist ideology, then Ridgewood will be seduced into abandoning our foundational math programs to welcome Everyday Math or TERC into all its elementary schools. This is neither a plan nor a solution to the problems clearly articulated over these past ten months and clearly defined in the focus group results for which the Board paid roughly $9,000 dollars.

We have extremely bright and talented people within both our district faculty and our community. Offering to punt the ball away to complete strangers is an insult to those who pay the taxes and to those employed by our district to provide such administrative guidance. We are the experts of the children of Ridgewood; the parents, the teachers, and the principals. It is a misuse of time (another year and a half!) and an expensive redundancy to rely on outside resources to direct us on how to best educate our own children. We already pay more than a few administrators quite handsomely to provide this expertise.

We are almost exactly in the same place that we were a year ago. The one progression is the acknowledgement by the administration for consistency of one math program to serve all 6 elementary schools. That this took an entire year to determine is shameful enough.

A university rightly has its own agenda and subset of interests. What guarantee is there that Ridgewood’s interests will be placed ahead of any university’s education ideology? This supposed plan shows a disturbing lack of confidence in those we’ve hired to administrate our schools. Every one of the administrative participants at Monday’s math workshop spoke of the need for our children to “think outside of the box” and be competent problem solvers. So thinking outside of the box means going outside of the town? Shouldn’t our Board, administrators and principals practice what they preach?

Don’t punt. This is a home grown problem that we have the resources to solve at home and the ability to solve sooner rather than later so that by September 2008, our students will be on the road to math success across the board. That’s nine months. We can do a lot in nine months. C’mon now.

Sarah-Kate Maskin

>
Published on Friday, January 18, 2008
BY EVONNE COUTROS, The Record – Hackensack, NJ
RIDGEWOOD — The village is one step closer to building a multi-level parking garage on North Walnut Street that would ease parking problems in the business district and add 10,000 square feet of stores in an area devoid of retail businesses.

The Village Council gave the nod this week to the North Walnut Street redevelopment plan, which could bring the 378-space garage to town by July 2009.

“We began a project to create a redevelopment district about a year ago, which encompasses almost the whole block,” said Village Manager James Ten Hoeve.

The redevelopment zone is mostly owned by the village and is bordered by East Ridgewood Avenue, Oak Street, North Walnut Street and Franklin Avenue, Ten Hoeve said.

The plan does not include the redevelopment of properties on the East Ridgewood side of the block, he said.
A developer of the property could be hired by May with construction beginning in July, according to a timeline for the development

“The ultimate plan is a ground level plus three stories of parking with open parking at the roof level,” Ten Hoeve said. “The conceptual drawings of the retail in 2005 called for 10,000 square feet of retail on the first level. It could be more. The plan also allows housing up to 12 affordable housing units.”

The dimensions of the garage call for the acquisition of portions of property between Oak Street and North Walnut for a rear access road to the new stores.

The plan also includes the acquisition of a service garage on Franklin Avenue owned by Ridgewood 120 LLC and currently for rent.

“We have an appraisal for $1.245 million,” Ten Hoeve said of the sum McGuire Associates of Jersey City — the village’s appraiser company — has offered the owners of the service garage property.

“We meet with the property owners and their attorney next week, and we hope we can come to an agreement,” Ten Hoeve said.

In the past, the property owners have asked for $2.1 million, Ten Hoeve said.
“If we come to terms then it’s a purchase,” Ten Hoeve said. “If not, then we will undertake the process of eminent domain.”

The next step is to hire a redeveloper, Ten Hoeve said.
A 2002 study had put the cost of construction at $5.6 million. The cost in the study included all property acquisition and 340 garage parking spaces, almost 40 spaces shy of what is called for in the current plan.

“Construction costs are up since 2002,” Ten Hoeve said. “The cost of steel has quadrupled probably. It will be a more expensive job, but we will see what we can do with the redeveloper.”

The intent by the council was to keep the structure from looking like a garage, Ten Hoeve said.
“Their goal was to have people drive down the street and never see a garage,” Ten Hoeve said. “The facade will be a little more expensive than most garages, and we hope it looks like brownstones.”

>12:52, I found an informative presentation on Saxon math via a web search using keywords “Saxon math” and “mastery”.

https://www.pattan.k12.pa.us/files/AYP/Saxon.pdf

Saxon appears to make full use of manipulatives and other similar techniques to enhance understanding. This has traditionally been a hallmark of reform math. So the question would be, shall Saxon be considered a “reform math” program.

I looked a little deeper, and found that in the Saxon program, these activities don’t appear to be at the center of the instructional process (at least not for long, and certainly never exclusively). Rather, these activities are only one among many means to an end. And this is where Saxon appears to distinguish itself from TERC/Investigations and Everyday Math.

Saxon appears to push hard toward the goal of subject matter mastery, and automaticity with respect to the recall of basic math facts, and the performance of efficient mathematical algorithms. It also has a heavy emphasis on regular and meaningful assessment. Finally, Saxon is definitely being sold as a “building block” or foundation-building program that prepares students for future achievement in higher level math subjects, a concept that has particular relevance with parents whose educational backgrounds and current jobs were/are very demanding from a mathematics perspective.

I can’t stress enough my dissatisfaction with any program that deliberately stops short of subject matter mastery or math facts automaticity. For example, both TERC/Investigations and Everyday Math are openly and unapologetically based on the assumption that it is a waste of time for teachers to push students towards the goal of achieving subject matter mastery, or demonstrating fluency and automaticity with respect to basic math facts, since most students either are incapable of doing so, or will be unwilling to do necessary work. This is one big reason why such programs are completely unacceptable to Ridgewood parents.

So the question becomes, why have such programs have survived as long as they have in Ridgewood?

After many months of mulling this question over, and carefully observing all the activities of the BOE and the district’s administrators, I have to conclude the following: Regina Botsford has a vested interest in keeping these programs in Ridgewood. Having had plenty of time to take the temperature of local taxpayers and parents, she knows that if she has any hope of cementing an ideologically pure version of reform math in place in Ridgewood, it is now or never. So she’s using every last bit of her power and bureaucratic force as the assistant superintendent of math instruction to bring about the result she favors. It is literally a one-man (woman) wrecking crew doing its work in real time, right in front of our eyes.

>

Residents living on and near Valley View Avenue came out in force to last night’s Village Council meeting, objecting loudly to Ridgewood Water’s plans for removing several mature trees and other foliage to facilitate construction of a 100 foot wide water tank near their homes. The proposed new tank would replace two smaller tanks which, according to Ridgewood Water representatives, are in danger of collapsing due to their age.

Mayor David T. Pfund advised gathered residents that neither he nor his fellow Council members had been provided with any details on the proposed project by Ridgewood Water Director Frank Moritz. It was agreed that such a project review would be scheduled for Wednesday evening, January 23. Further dialog between Council members and the public will take place following the scheduled executive briefing by Moritz.

>

During Wednesday’s Village Council Public Meeting Mary Green and John Papietro, both members of local volunteer ambulance corps, objected passionately to the introduction of Ordinance #3098, which, if approved, will establish fees for Emergency Medical Service third party billing.

Under the proposed plan, patients’ insurance carriers would be billed $550 plus $0.10 per mile for transport services, and $125 for Emergency Medical response without transport.

Green and Papietro both cautioned Council members that implementing such a plan could make it even harder to recruit willing volunteer workers, and also create difficulty establishing mutual aid agreements with adjacent volunteer ambulance corps.

In addition to hearing comments on the issue from Green and Papietro, Council members were also chastised by a local officer of the New Jersey First Aid Council, who read off a list of approximately 25 reasons “not to transition from volunteer to paid” emergency medical service.

A public hearing on Ordinance #3098 will be held on Wednesday, February 13 during the Village Council’s regularly scheduled Public Meeting.

>

M.J. McDermott, the meterologist from Seattle who explained Everyday Math so beautifully, has brought us a new video. This time it is about Saxon Math.

>As i stated in another section of this blog years ago the street dept had just north of 20 employees now their are half that amount. you cant get the same work done with half the crew.also the leaves came down very late this year.maybe its time to look at managment to see whats wrong the street dept. is so short handed they borrow workers from other depts.to get it done. if things are this bad money wise in the village someone on top should be held accountable.