I finally figured out what it is that really gets my goat in the debate over where District 150 wants to put its new school. It’s cynicism.
A letter printed on the Journal Star editorial page today (under the misnomer “Another View,” since it’s the same view as the JS Editorial Board’s) is a good example. Even though I disagree with her, Dawn Gersich of Peoria makes some good arguments in favor of the Glen Oak Park site for the new school. Those are appropriate and helpful to the debate. What is not helpful is the cynical eye she casts on those who disagree:
Regarding the proposed school site in Glen Oak Park, I have yet to hear, “What’s best for the children?”
And:
The fate of our neighborhoods, indeed our nation, is dependent on the investment we place in our children. It’s a shame that some people get caught up in politics and forget that we should be focused on what is best for kids.
See? Those who oppose the Glen Oak Park site are not concerned about what’s best for the children and are “caught up in politics.” This attribution of ulterior motives is known as cynicism.
Ms. Gersich is not the only cynical one. Garrie Allen said in an interview on WCBU last week that he believed the city council and others have “an agenda” to “clean up” the East Bluff. In other words, he thinks they’re more interested in urban renewal than what’s best for the children’s education. Mr. Matheson has made similar remarks.
This kind of rhetoric is horribly misleading, and it is not healthy for the debate.
First of all, Peorians want District 150 to succeed. They want the best for their children and all children in the city. They want the schools to be second to none so people want to move into District 150 instead of out of it. The debate is not between those who care about the children and those who care about politics. We all care about the children.
Secondly, doing what’s best for the children cannot be divorced from considering what’s best for the city and what’s best for the financial health of the school district.
You can dismiss city cooperation as “politics” if you want, but the school is not an enclave, uneffected by and not affecting the city. If urban flight continues, if crime increases, if property values continue to go down, it’s not just the city that loses, it’s the school district. They lose students, performance, property tax revenue, and federal funds. Similarly, if schools are in disrepair and test scores are low, it’s not just the school district that suffers, it’s the city, because what young family wants to live in a failing school district? The city and school district must work together for their mutual success, and that directly affects the children.
Another unpleasant subject when determining “what’s best for the children” is money. You know what would be best for my children? The best private tutor(s) money can buy, then college at Harvard or Oxford. Are my kids going to get that? No. I don’t have the money to do that. When you want to do what’s best for the children, you have to what’s best for them within your means.
The school district is in bad financial shape. Contrary to popular belief, their ambitious plan to build new schools was not based purely on “what’s best for the children.” The plan came about as a way for the district to save money. The idea is to eliminate old, inefficient buildings, and consolidate into fewer, larger, but more efficient buildings. Educational experts will tell you that “what’s best for the children” are small, neighborhood schools — not large, consolidated schools. In fact, a District 150 subcommittee headed up by Bradley professor Bernard Goitein reported exactly that to the school board before the master building plan was put together.
I say all this, not to say that the school board doesn’t have the best interests of the students at heart (I believe they do), but to point out that the issue is not as black and white as some letter writers would have you believe. Both sides in this debate want what’s best for the children, but have different views on how to accomplish that within the financial means of the district and in cooperation with the city.
CJ, you make many good points. There are those, however,who are more interested in promoting their career; political ambitions; etc, than the goal of “promoting the common good”. Which is why the public needs to keep reminding them of the proper goal, which is “promoting the common good,” not just “what’s best for the children”. As you point out so well, the children do not live in a vaccum. That being said we can disagree on whether fewer, bigger, newer and “more efficient” buildings are really more efficient or cheaper to operate. I could make an argument that they are not. Think about all those business mergers that would allegedly create more efficient enterprises, etc., etc. Almost without exception they produced inferior products at higher prices. Bigger schools have been producing inferior products at higher prices ever since we started consolidating fifty years ago. Two of the biggest reasons:
Fewer people actually working and more overpaid out-of-touch “administrators” shuffling paper; Too few kids getting any recognition or responsibility and most getting lost in a maize of bureacracy and drudgery.
I would like to encourage those reading this to email the School Board, Ken Hinton, relevant City Councilpeople, etc. I have, and I don’t even live in District 150. I’m just that concerned about this, in re: the health of the city of Peoria. (I’m not linking you to them. I figure, if you’re a netizen enough to be reading blogs, you are a netizen enough to locate their emails online by yourself).
I have received nothing, save one, but respectful and grateful emails from those I’ve contacted (including Barbara VanAuken, Alicia Butler and Dr. Sean Matheson). Dr. Matheson even said (paraphrasing) that we both (me and him) want what is best for the kids, but disagree on location almost exclusively. We were in concert on several issues, despite the potential simplification that we are on opposing sides.
I am one of those valued “young, well educated professionals” that everyone wants to have moving into Peoria (or any city attempting renewal right now). But I chose to move into the Mossville school district, since every single person I spoke to prior to and upon moving here trashed district 150, save the Kellar-Lindbergh schools. I’d love to live closer to work (Bradley), but I was bombarded by negative comments about D150. Research backed up our decision.
I don’t know what D150 needs, since I’m no educational expert or even remotely close to it. But CJ is right. Evidence does not support consolidation, building on large park land, etc. I want a friendly debate, and encourage you, like CJ and I, to be civil and get involved, if only electronically.
CJ, I respectfully disagree on your first point about cynicism in Ms. Gersich’s piece. I don’t think she is saying that ALL people who are against the new school at Glen Oak Park don’t have the children’s interest at heart. I think what she is saying is and I have to agree, that in the heat of all this discussion and forums so far, no one has come forward with concerns as to what impact this will have on children. I believe that many of those who oppose the GP location indeed do have the kids in mind and have said so, but there are those who just want to jump on the band wagon and I don’t mean the common citizen. I mean the politicians and so called “movers” of this city. These are the people that scare me the most and I think that is what she means, so in that sense, yes she is cynical. This is an election year of sorts and any and all politicians always show up and promise the moon during these times. After all, it’s easy to spend money when it’s not yours. Just ask our city council.
Allen’s agenda I believe is altogether different. That too, is easy when you can play the race card when things don’t go your way. Ask our ex-super about that. Who knows what he’s thinking and after watching him on the board, I am not sure even he knows.
What’s best for the city concerning our schools is that our schools become second to none. I don’t think Glen Oak School, wherever it’s built is going to change Dist 150’s current reputation, but it is a start in the right direction on updating our buildings, climate controlled buildings. No one likes to learn when you sweat or freeze. I know this isn’t the right thing to say, but packaging is everything when it comes to people. Brand name products are known to Americans simply by their colors and people will not try anything different because the package art appeals to them even though there may be a better product. I think this works with our schools. If the buildings look new or newer and well maintained, that alone sets the perception that some people will think about the school. I know that this will not pass here as people who blog and people who read blogs are usually better read and understand that the package can deceive. When looking for a job years ago, I dressed in a suit. I thought first impression was everything even though it was just a warehouse job. 🙂
wow. that’s really relatively … vicious.
I was under the impression that folks had been talking about almost nothing BUT what’s best for the children, but apparently I am crazy. 😛
CJ:
SCREAM! The issue of D150 resiting for schools is not the racial issue that the race card players want to play. This is issue is multifaceted among which personal accountability and responsibility extend to everyone, including students. Success of students is important and critical to the success of Peoria and society as a whole. Schools were different in the ‘olden’ days and the park, race, education, discipline, personal accountability and responsibility et al components were the litmus tests items — not the blackc and white issue. Take for instance the case of Leo High School in Chicago, initially a white school that is now after many decades in a predominantly African American neighborhood which is funded by the white alumni. Entrants to this high school generally achieve 40% on the entrance exam and after four years of putting their shoulders and brain to work, achieve a 93% rate of attending Loyola, West Point, Purdue … since 1991. So, stop playing the race card —- is not the issue. The issue is unity in purpose to stabilize Peoria’s neighborhoods and its schools as an integral part of that stabilization.