Every week I read the varied opinions of Manhassetites, each focusing on personal gripes with society at large, few offering viable solutions. As does last weeks' letter by Mr. Garges' concern about monies expended toward "unneeded" new school facilities. Mr. Garges however doesn't offer realistic solutions in today's world. Complying within the editorial space confines, you'll forgive the grammar restrictions.

First, 10 percent increase in class size allowance would not accommodate the huge migration of new families into Manhasset in the past five years. Every speck of available land gets a new house, pre-sold to a family with school age children. Existing homes that are for sale by people whose children have "flown the coop", are absorbed by young families within weeks of marketing. Granted, not all of these families utilize our public schools, but most do. Secondly, existing class sizes have already reached reasonable capacity. Case in point. I have a child in middle school with classes reaching 30 kids, just below the 32 per class maximum, as per teacher's contract. What will happen to my third-grader when in middle school?

Mr. Garges' comparison to NYC is no comparison. Four years ago, I moved to Manhasset from NYC School District 26, one of the best in the city. As everyone knows, the NYC Board of Ed spends more time arguing than teaching. I don't blame teachers for leaving.

The reason Chaminade keeps costs in the $5,000 range is due to grants from a multitude of sources. As do other parochial and private schools.

I especially find amusing the second to last paragraph of Mr. Garges' letter. "When I went to school..." right off speaks of a different time, inapplicable in today's environment.

I do however, agree with his closing statement. Student success is made up of two major ingredients, the home and the will to succeed, with a big focus in "the home." Having said that let me now get to, what I perceive as a viable solution.

I am not a professional educator, nor an expert on the mechanics of teaching. I am however, a parent with hands-on experience on staying up late, helping my kids with projects, participating in PTAs (SCA, as it's known here) in parochial schools, and a product of the NYC public school system of the '70s ... ok '60s.

The one proven way, which allows children to learn, is having their undivided attention during information transfer from teacher to student. What do I mean by that? Today's society bombards children with constant distractions. There's more to do, more to see, more to absorb than ever before. TV didn't exist during WWII; the Internet wasn't present 25 years ago. (I'm guilty too, mistake to bring satellite TV in the house) Our society is based on the consumption of products rather than the development of ones intellect. Must have video games with a 3 week life span and $200 sneakers didn't exist a generation ago. Why do the parochial/private schools do better with larger class sizes? They implement rules that incorporate discipline, which in turn leaves no option to the child, but to listen to a teacher, thus absorbing the information relayed. They also have other "common denominators" such as uniforms, religious or ethnic similarities, further contributing to the focus factor and the reduction of distractions. Perhaps public schools should implement a "common denominator," such as uniforms. A minimal expense with maximum potential.

However, public schools, by law, cannot implement such rules, resulting in the child's focus to be easily diverted from the teacher. Instead, public schools need to keep class sizes to a minimum, in order to maintain a child's attention. Proven examples are home schooling, after school tutoring and the runaway businesses of so called "learning centers." Why do these mechanisms work? One on one instruction, reinforcing the concept of small class sizes.

After extensive research, I decided to move to Manhasset for its better public schools and small town community environment. Crowding our classrooms will only contribute in making us indifferent to each other. I'd rather spend $10 to build schools now, than $100 later. On average, our children spend 50 percent of their days in schools; we must maintain the quality of that environment. How can we place a dollar value on our children's education. Yes Mr. Garges, a new school IS need.

I welcome Mr. Garges' feedback, as well as everyone's, at dennisdionisiou@yahoo.com.

Dennis Dionisiou