Comments on: High school design preserves schools, limits transfers, seeks equity

By: Steve Rawley

Steve Rawley — Sat, 27 Jun 2009 16:50:14 +0000

Sheila, I haven’t forgotten K8s, and I’m mad about it, too. I have a kid starting 5th grade next year. We don’t have a middle school in our cluster (Jefferson).

For what it’s worth, K8s are next on the agenda for SACET, so it appears that’s next on the priority list for Carole. I personally pushed to have this mess straightened out (or ameliorated) for the school year that just ended, and was disappointed in the lack of response.

By: S. Wilcox

S. Wilcox — Sat, 27 Jun 2009 15:30:34 +0000

What you are saying sounds logical Steve. But as a teacher who has to go back to a K-8 school with no room for the program “they” promised we’d have, and no input into what that program was supposed to look like, I am MAD!!! When I call to get answers, I get put off or yelled at. And now it feels as if everyone has “moved on” to the next thing, high school reform, when K-8s aren’t even close to being dealt with. Are they even going to?

By: Steve Rawley

Steve Rawley — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 13:47:48 +0000

ppsvet: In diplomacy it is often necessary to negotiate in good faith, even when trust has been violated in the past. PPS is the only school district most of us have. Some families can afford to move out of district or send their children to private school; most cannot.

As for community input, PAT placed a fair number of outspoken teachers on an influential internal PPS design committee, which was instrumental in defining what a comprehensive high school education should look like. I served on a citizens’ committee that had input on the design. I’m not fond of the big public meetings, but Smith’s team held a number of those, too. Other community groups were consulted. Perfect process? No. Better than the public process under the previous regime? Hell yes.

I guarantee you that the outcome was not predetermined on this. This was not a process of cramming a preordained design down our throats.

This move is big, but it’s not some crazy experimental re-org foisted exclusively on poor and minority schools by a corporate foundation. It’s a very common sense, district-wide approach, similar to a system that’s currently working quite well in the Beaverton School District.

So… trust? Not necessarily. Good faith? What other choice do most of us have? Standing on the sidelines throwing stones is not an effective means of negotiation.

Terrified: yes, we’ve got to get back to K8s. Hopefully the HS model will serve as an example, particularly with regard to all students being guaranteed a slot in a comprehensive school close to their home.

By: terrified

terrified — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 09:18:32 +0000

And now that we have that settled, can we turn our attention back to the k8 fiasco?

By: ppsvet

ppsvet — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 04:04:26 +0000

How could anyone trust these people at this point? They’re going to fix the high schools just like they fixed K-8. I’m almost 60 years old. I went to PPS schools. I have believed in them. I teach in PPS and I have little belief that anything good will come from this latest manipulation of our kids.

Maybe it’s time that people who have a stake in the system have some input. Not just the careerists like Vicki Phillips and I’m afraid Carole Smith.

Maybe some people with some stake in the community and not just people who see PPS as a notch in their career belt should have some input.

Nah. It hasn’t been that way in a long time.

I’m glad that I’m ready to retire. I’m tired or rearranging the chairs on the Titanic.

This is a shame. This used to be a wonderful district. One of the last good large city systems.