Back in April when the District 150 Board of Education decided to discontinue live broadcasts of the board meetings, they presented it as a cost-saving measure. I had this to say:
In other words, this move has little to do with cost savings. It’s simply a further manifestation of the district’s desire to minimize, if not eliminate, public input and public access to the school board meetings.
Last night, board members admitted that was indeed the case. From Peoria Story:
Board members acknowledged that the reason they stopped the broadcasts was not, as was initially reported, to save money, but because they objected to negative comments from the public during the public comment portion of the meeting. “It (the money) was never my reason,” Jim Stowell said. “Nor mine,” board president Debbie Wolfmeyer said.
And the Journal Star adds these quotes:
“. . . The board has tried, but I think the board has the responsibility to try to shape the message they want to convey to the public. . . . I’ve heard the same four people at 70 percent of those meetings. . . . and I doubt that very few of them, if any, have any children in the district.” . . .
“I was in favor of taking the broadcast off until we could do something about how to answer people or how to tell our own story – we don’t answer people or questions or rebut anything, so all the public really hear is what other people are saying,” board member Martha Ross said, wanting to revisit the idea because community members have asked her to do so. “It’s their only connection to what’s going on at the school district.”
I would submit that these board members don’t quite understand the concept of petitioning the government for redress of grievances. They think they should get to take our money and feed us back a message they “shape” and “want to convey to the public.” All dissenting opinions should be censored or effectively hidden from the public.
This is just now coming at a revelation, to some of you, that the different union presidents work more for the district than they do for their union members?
I have no idea why they call them unions because virtually nothing is done in the best interest of the “union”. Definition…..UNION The act of uniting or the state of being united.
Sharon Crews, when does District Watchers meet? Does anyone take minutes? I would love to try to make one, but just don’t know when. I am interested.
“An administrator, superintendent or principal is NOT the boss of a teacher.”
I would not choose the word ‘boss’ but the principal SHOULD be the supervisor of teachers. The Principal should be able to hire and fire teachers based on performance.
A good supervisor enables their subordinates to do their jobs to maximum efficacy.
Superintendents should be the supervisors of principals. Likewise a good superintendent enables their subordinates to their jobs to maximum efficacy. If the overall school fails to perform then the principals should be dismissed.
Interestingly there are political surveys for the 2010 election, being done regarding this very sort of question.
Dennis in Peoria, I always announce the meeting (time and place) on this blog. We meet the Sunday before every board meeting at Monical’s (on Lake and Knoxville) at 6 p.m. We don’t take minutes–we are not a very organized group. We just meet to discuss the latest 150 issues. Collectively we seem to gather quite a bit of information because as individuals we represent various facets of District 150 (teachers, retirees, 150 parents, clerical and other non-certified staff, general public, and occasionally a board member–mostly Laura). And you would be very welcome. Sometimes we even dispel rumors. For instance, some of us had heard a rumor that all the pictures at Woodruff of classes, valedictorians, etc., were going to be trashed. However, Terry made a phone call and found out that all those things are going to remain on the walls of Woodruff until a decision is made as to a suitable place for them, etc.
The group was started two years ago when the district floated the idea of cutting 45 minutes of every school day for teachers to collaborate. For instance, Terry and I had never attended a board meeting since we retired in 2005, but all that changed. Many of those interested in the 45 minute proposal realized that there were other issues that deserved our time and energy.
Mahkno, I agree with your post entirely. Unfortunately, poor principal performance has been a topic of discussion among teachers for years. The person in charge of overseeing principal performance felt it was more important to be their friend instead of their evaluator. That is why many sub-par principals have been able to keep their jobs in D150. If you look at their past evaluations, they are all excellent. This person did not listen to teachers or staff, wait, she did listen, she simply did nothing about it and made the lives of the teachers coming forward a living hell from the principal they spoke to her about. And, nothing changed. If teachers are held to high standards, principals should be held to HIGHER standards. They should also be fired if they are unable to do their job with the highest of professionalism.
Sharon + 1, believe it or not, I agree with you 100%. I would add that some principals have the opposite problem, but the same problem that you accuse the principal boss of having. I have been at a school where every teacher got “excellent” from a certain admin that was more interested in being the teachers friend than giving honest evals and helping us become better. Which then leads to subpar teachers being allowed to define our profession.
Just heard a rumor (from a good source) that the technology department has been given directions to re-install a computer lab at Woodruff for “professional development”. Thought that building was “closing”?? Anyone else heard this also??
It is the job of the School Board to hire, evaluate, and possibly fire superintendents. If the job isn’t getting done… well you know what to do next election. Beating on teachers and principals because those higher up are not doing their job, is pointless. Every business has their crop of mediocre talent. School districts are no exception.
If we have a situation where neither principals nor superintendents can do their jobs because of poor conceived and written job protection rules… well again back superintendent and the school board.
Average teacher apology accepted, most people that have been bullied are angry and bitter. And that is what is going on (or did last year) at my school. My students and I were placed in dangerous situations daily and no one did much of anything about it. That’s abuse! Not following written procedures in the handbook, means bottom line the principal is NOT doing their job. As I said, I believe if the situation would have occured in another teacher’s classroom, the child would have been dealt with in the correct manner. But I do know alot of teachers were complaining about kids that were fighting and abusive toward other kids coming back to class later in the day.
It is very scary and I am not at all a violent person. My own kids don’t fist fight, we don’t solve our problems that way, and it shouldn’t be overlooked in the classroom. It is automatic assault charges at my kids’ school if students are fighting (at middle school/high school level anyway… i don’t think elementary school kids fist fight too much in my children’s school district. They did in Peoria last year!) Obviously, no my own kids do not go to 150. I thought about moving and supporting my district, but NO WAY! I didn’t even want my non-violent students to have to be subjected to this each and every day.
Everytime that a student got away with the abuse, it made the entire class worse… It seemed to be the “mood” of the principal that day. There was no clear reason why one day a student would be suspended for something and the next sent back to the classroom. Pretty psycho actually.
And no you werent allowed to question anything, if you did (which is what got me on “the list” in the first place last summer) apparently that is when you are stalked by the “controlled” teachers… looking, making up something to make it look like you are a bad teacher, like I should have been able to keep my student from bringing weapons into the class. Perhaps I should have purchased a metal detector for my classroom door… yes, I am being a smarty. It is my sense of humor. It was a no win situation…no one seems to be too surprised though that this was going on, must also happen in a lot of other district 150 schools. Way too much violence, way too much and it is a trickle down from the adults in Peoria… our kids (students) have a lot of it in their neighborhoods and some in their homes. The last thing the schools need to do is brush it off as acceptable. IT’S NOT.
This is all bureaucratic pyramid business model nonsense…
“the principal SHOULD be the supervisor of teachers. The Principal should be able to hire and fire teachers based on performance.
A good supervisor enables their subordinates to do their jobs to maximum efficacy.”
You think the principal is a King, and I think he should be a President.
The principal should be answerable to the teacher, not the other way around. Teachers should elect their own principal from their own ranks.
Interesting concept…teachers hire the principal but then the principal can also hire and fire teachers…. Hummmmm.
Speaking of rules–this was the last paragraph of my comments at tonight’s board meeting:
“Now for the latest 150 rumor. I have heard that the district is no longer keeping tardy records for students—which would, also, mean no consequences for being late to class. Is this rumor or fact? Is this a policy on which the board will vote—I certainly want to see that show of hands. Will the students be led to believe that they will suffer consequences? They will figure it out; I’m all for them finding out right now so that the chaos will be apparent immediately. Students respond to honesty; they will take advantage of dishonesty.”
After the public comments at every BOE meeting, Dr. Lathan is given time to address any comments made by the speakers. I believe this time was instituted partly due to Jim Stowell’s complaint that we speakers often make incorrect statements, etc., that need to be addressed. That is why I labeled my comment as a rumor to be dispelled. Well, Dr. Lathan commented on several issues brought up by speakers, but nothing about mine. Therefore, am I to believe that the rumor is not a rumor at all but fact.
Terry, also, commented on how unusual it is that there have been no suspensions on the board agenda for at least the last two meetings. Yet one teacher spoke about the chaos that is occurring regularly at her school. What is replacing suspensions as a consequences for inappropriate behavior? Does anyone have any insight?
The tardies show up on Skyward.
TR64–I have heard that two principals have already stated that tardies won’t be counted–I guess they can be recorded. I brought this issue up with regard to Summer School 2009–I FOIA’d the attendance (absences and tardies). The summer school rule has always been that three tardies equal one absence. Those were the rules for summer 2009. However, when I analyzed the data, I realized that the tardies were not counted as absences–they just weren’t counted at all. However, they were recorded as tardies–but “T” on Skyward doesn’t mean anything if there are no consequences.
Professional-
It sounds like you worked at the same school I did. On numerous occasions students were fighting and nothing was ever done. One student even had a gun in his bookbag. Would you believe that we didn’t even go on lockdown? No one knew about it-the only reason I found out was because I was walking past the teacher’s room, and she told me to go to my room and lock the door. Another student had a knife, and a 3rd grader had fireworks. Again, nothing was done.
I was told I needed to ‘build relationships with my students and the fighting would stop.’ I spoke out against this principal and the things that were going on in the school…guess what happened? I was given an ‘unsatisfactory’ because I was unable to be professional and didn’t get along with the staff. That principal observed me ONE TIME the entire year. The lesson I learned was to keep my mouth shut and mind my own business.
Been There–What we need is many “Been There” teachers to step forward. I know that it is hard to do, but the problems will not be solved until all this gets to the public–non stop. I believe the district is now taking one step further to self-destruction by relaxing (or destroying) the rules on tardies and apparently slowing way down on suspensions. Now that public comments are not aired (because a parent took this risk last night), the board is home free (of all criticism). They tolerate listening to us because they know that few others will hear what we say.
Heard that principals were told @ the start of the school yr that they wouldn’t be allowed to suspend students this year. This came from a 20+ yr veteran teacher who said it came down from Dr L. Guess that would explain no suspensions being on the agenda lately
I hope that Dr. Lathan will soon be willing to make this news public–or to refute it. She needs to share the “why,” she believes that no tardies and no suspensions will lead to a better District 150. Most of all I want to hear from board members–and potential board members–on this subject. In the end, the buck stops with them.
Sharon-
I am not sure of Dr. Lathan’s reason for not allowing suspensions. I do know from my experience that the principal believed that students need to be in the classroom. She wouldn’t allow students to be sent to the office unless there was a SEVERE problem. Maybe Dr. Lathan thinks that by suspending a student they are not learning. My thought is that their behavior is preventing others from learning. But what do I know?
Teachers and principals are being required to follow IEPs for suspending SPECIAL ED students for issues that are in their IEPs; there are a limited number of days of suspension available in that situation before other interventions are required. Schools are being urged to implement stepped interventions for Special Ed students BEFORE going to suspensions, rather than after.
Any principals or teachers who are claiming suspensions are not allowed are misinformed and should contact their instructional leader for clarification. The directive only relates to Special Ed and only directs that IEPs be followed more carefully than they sometimes have been in the past.
In other words, there is a chain of command that teachers need to follow before reacting and kicking large numbers of black males out of class, just because they don’t want to deal with them. This may require a little more work on the teacher’s part, but following IEPs (many of which are unwarranted and just given to students because they are a minority from a certain neighborhood) is a part of their job.
Emerge-
Where in blazes did you get that it is only black males getting kicked out of class? Why must you make this a racial/gender issue? There are no white males or any females getting kicked out of class? Gimme a break!
WOW, WoW
Did I say that ONLY black males get kicked out of class?
“Just because they don’t want to deal with them?”
Maybe if their PARENTS had dealt with them properly while they were raising them the teachers wouldn’t have to be dealing with them now. You people that expect teachers to be parents, teachers, counselors, psychiatrists and God knows what else are way off base. Put the blame where the blame lies! AT HOME!
Emerge-
You and I both know you did not actually SAY that. You only mentioned “black males”. Are you not concerned about the white males and all females that are being kicked out of class because the teachers “don’t want to deal with them”?
Dr. Lathan phoned me this morning to tell me that the tardy policy in District 150 has not changed. I will write more later about our conversation, which, also, dealt with the suspension issue. I just don’t have time right now–but will later.
WOW
Did I say that I am “not concerned about the white males and all females that are being kicked out of class because the teachers “don’t want to deal with them”?” No I didn’t; just like I didn’t “SAY” that “only black males get kicked out of class”.
Emerge said,”In other words, there is a chain of command that teachers need to follow before reacting and kicking large numbers of black males out of class, just because they don’t want to deal with them.”
Suppose a student continues to refuse to stop talking while you are trying to teach Language Arts. You ask him nicely, you re-direct him, then again, ask him to be quiet while we are reading the story aloud…..he then looks at you and says, “I don’t have to, you shut-up you saggy t@tted b@@ch.” He finally is sent to the office, only to return shortly, laughing. Emerge, how would you have handled this? His mother would NOT return a phone call….
Another fascinating revelation! I just looked through the board policies related to students (on the district website under board policies attendance, suspensions, etc.)—there is absolutely no mention of the word “tardy” or any consequences for being late to school or classes. Maybe I’m not looking in the right place—can anyone enlighten me? These policies are dated 2005—after I left teaching. Is it possible that Dr. Lathan called me to refute the rumor I heard about a policy that doesn’t exist at all? What irony!
Dr. Lathan called me at 8 a.m. today (Thursday). She was extremely congenial; we had a pleasant conversation. She first told me that the tardy policy in District 150 had not changed. Then she asked me where I had heard the rumor. I did laugh and told her that I wouldn’t be revealing that information. She said, “Come on, Sharon.” She said that she wanted to know if principals were changing policies in their buildings and blaming her. She didn’t mention blogs, but I told her that (because I write on blogs and because I have mentioned this situation) I would write about our conversation.
Toward the end of the conversation, I asked her for clarification. I asked if the tardy policy would remain the same—in that a certain number of tardies result in a suspension. She said, “What is it—three tardies make an absence?” I told her that policy was for summer school only. I went on to say that I thought an accumulation of 18 tardies was considered to be an offense for which a suspension was a possible consequence. (I was astounded—since, at a recent board meeting, I discussed this summer school policy and mentioned that the FOIA’d records revealed the policy hadn’t change, but it wasn’t followed at all.)
She offered that she had spoken to the principals, telling them to monitor suspensions. She said the reason for the directive was that she feels that not all principals are on the same page with regard to the reasons for suspending students. (She did not mention anything at all about the IEP argument mentioned by Laura Petelle.)
My comments about the phone conversation: First of all, I really want to know if teachers believe there is a tardy policy—and if there is one. Secondly, I was somewhat stunned that Dr. Lathan expected me to tell her my “sources.” Also, I called the information a rumor, but I really don’t believe it was a rumor. It may have been a misunderstanding—but not a rumor. Also, I was told that the reason for not counting tardies was that tardies somehow affect money received from the state. That makes no sense to me unless Dr. Lathan believed that three tardies are equal to an absence in regular school.
Also, if I were the superintendent and someone stood up at a board meeting to accuse me of changing a board policy without a board vote, I would have wanted that cleared up ASAP. There is a time set aside at the BOE meeting for that very purpose. I didn’t leave right after the meeting—Karen, Terry, and I were probably the last to leave. Dr. Lathan could have spoken to me then. I do wonder why she wanted so long to call me.
Dr. Lathan’s obvious confusion or lack of knowledge about policy makes me wonder why she has not been assigned a mentor—actually, I thought the school code made a monitor mandatory.
As to suspension, “monitoring” and a “moratorium” are not the same. Also, I am hearing all sorts of reports (rumors, if you like) about students who have been suspended in the last two weeks—but the board hasn’t voted on any in the last four weeks.
Sharon-
I am impressed that she called you. Do you think Hinton would have done that?
Give her credit–agreed! I do give her credit; she is very pleasant. The part about the mentor–for her own sake, she should have one. She is new to the area, etc., and so are others. Few people know District 150 history. She needs to get better advice. Even the lawyer is new. The atmosphere at board meetings has improved, also. It feels friendly. Sorry, but that doesn’t mean that I will be looking at everything through rose-colored glasses. There are so many undercurrents going on right now about discipline problems in the schools. Teachers are afraid to speak out. These issues just can’t be swept under the rug(s).
A few words about the PHS letter–I do understand their feelings of being picked on and/or singled out. I hope everyone can get over this paranoia that is foisted on all teachers, administrators, parents, etc. When students fight in school, are unruly and rude to neighbors, etc.–that is not the fault of teachers or administrators (maybe not even parents). Certainly, it isn’t the fault of the students who behave and there are many. We have been blamed so much that we have come subtly to accept the blame. It doesn’t help that some administrators (and I have heard them myself) say that students would behave if they were engaged by teachers. That is baloney!!! These behaviors have deep-seated causes that are way beyond the control of teachers. These kids have goods days and bad days, but there is always the potential for extreme behaviors–they need help behind what can be provided in the classroom.
I know it’s difficult, but PHS teachers, administrators, and parents should not allow the district to ignore the problems–their reasons are different than yours, but the results will be the same. The problems will get worse, not better. I watched it happen at Manual–ignoring one problem after the other did not have good results.
“She said the reason for the directive was that she feels that not all principals are on the same page with regard to the reasons for suspending students. ”
This is absolutely true. The discipline reports that the Board receives will sometimes have huge disparities between schools. (And one of the roles of the Board is to monitor and correct such disparities.) The issue isn’t whether students should be disciplined — misbehaving students should certainly be disciplined — but it is an issue of fairness and equity for students at different schools to be held to the same standards (that is, the ones in the board policy handbook).
“but it is an issue of fairness and equity for students and different schools to be held to the same standards (that is, the ones in the board policy handbook).”
And there is no D150 board policy on tardiness. Nor does there appear to be any statutory requirements regarding tardiness in the Illinois School Code. Dunlap board policy does NOT address tardiness, either. However, individual Dunlap schools have created their own policies on tardiness. The procedures at Dunlap Middle are different than at Dunlap High, for example. Someone on Emerge’s blog also described the tardy policy that DOES exist at Richwoods.
I’d like to see more things handled at the school level, rather than handed down from above. I understand the need for centralization to comply with state laws – tardiness isn’t one of them.
Laura–this is music to my ears. There is absolutely no logical reason for behavior interventions at a school to skyrocket, for five consecutive years, upon a change in building management. Same standards for all…music to my ears.
Laura, all that you said could well be true. However, that doesn’t explain why the board has not voted on any suspensions for the last two BOE meetings. (Why aren’t the minutes posted for September 27–shouldn’t they be up as soon as they are approved by the board?) There are some offenses for which there is no question no matter what page you are reading. Am I to assume that no students in the district have committed an offense deserving of suspension in the last four weeks? How long will it take to get everyone on this elusive page?
Jon, I truly believe that District 150 did have a tardy policy before 2005. I am not sure how a district as small as 150 with only three high schools can have three different tardy policies. We just saw what happened when the board had the perception that the dress code was not “uniform” at all three high schools. The perception of fairness has to prevail in the district–kids move from one school to another too often to sustain three separate policies–and one each for all primary and middle schools.
TR64–I am not sure what you mean? Are you saying more students are being disciplined at a particular school–in increasing numbers?
Sharon, I don’t think anyone is asking for people to ignore the problems, I think they just want the reasons those problems exist or the blame for their existence to not be limited to failure of teachers/staff/school admins (in some cases!) or the student body in general.
This is what I see at PHS since the merger: With the large increase in student population, the need for an alternative high school for those students who choose not to (or have not learned how to) behave appropriately and need who additional support/structure/intervention before they can return to their home schools is greater than ever. Whether the cause is familial, socio-economic or other, students who consistently disrupt the learning process need to be placed in an alternative setting for their own good and the good of the student body at large. This INCLUDES disciplinary issues and would keep students in school rather than suspended or expelled. Those options still need to be available for serious or criminal infractions.
Laura, thanks for your productive comments on this blog. Regarding SpEd student suspension limits and IEPs, stepped interventions and the support mechanisms they need (staff, space, etc.) have to be available and in place before they can be used (not just suggested in BIPs). You might want to ask what specific stepped interventions are available and supported, at least for high school students.
I specifically know of one stepped intervention that was cut (supposedly for $$ reasons) last year, despite being successful in keeping SpEd students (mainly BD/ED/LD) from out-of-school suspension. Just keeping disruptive students in the classroom with no consequences does not help them learn appropriate behaviors and definitely does not help the other students in that class. It also undermines the classroom teachers and support staff and makes their job that much more challenging.
hot in the city–all so true; this is the first time in a long time that I haven’t added the part about the alternative school. I think I hit some of these issues on Emerge’s blog–no need to repeat them here. No school in 150 has a chance of survival without an alternative school. That’s the main reason I want the spotlight to stay on the problems–hoping that sooner rather than later the powers-that-be will acknowledge the need for an alternative school.
“However, that doesn’t explain why the board has not voted on any suspensions for the last two BOE meetings.”
Sharon, I’m not currently on the discipline committee so I don’t have direct knowledge (although I can find out if it’s a huge problem), but some schools simply process the paperwork faster than others; parents must be notified and sometimes that takes longer than one would think; and sometimes there’s a whole process of negotiation about whether a student will go into abeyance when it’s a drug or alcohol violation. Given all of those things, combined with some apparent confusion on the suspension policy at some schools, I’m honestly not terribly worried about it this early in the year. If we kept never seeing suspensions, I would start to worry, but the most recent discipline reports didn’t strike me as particularly odd or out of line.
“I specifically know of one stepped intervention that was cut (supposedly for $$ reasons) last year, despite being successful in keeping SpEd students (mainly BD/ED/LD) from out-of-school suspension. Just keeping disruptive students in the classroom with no consequences does not help them learn appropriate behaviors and definitely does not help the other students in that class. It also undermines the classroom teachers and support staff and makes their job that much more challenging.”
Hot, I completely agree. It’s difficult because of budget constraints, but we absolutely must do our best to ensure both that students have appropriate support and intervention AND that students who misbehave have appropriate consequences, and I know that these interventions and consequences are something the administration is working on.
There is almost always going to be someone is who happy, someone who is not, and someone who doesn’t care – regardless of the policy of lack thereof. Centralizing every minor decision leads to bureaucratic waste. Intelligent people, knee deep in the issue, aren’t empowered enough to make simple decisions in the current system – thus very little actually changes.
In my opinion, if you want to see change, the district should push down as much decision-making as possible to the schools/principals, who in turn empower teachers more. The current centralized system is structured like McDonalds. That style is great for McDonalds. Fast and cheap – even though you can’t order a hamburger for breakfast (take it out of the freezer and stick it on the grill – geez). Educating people is an ever-evolving process and one that is not, from an organizational model, conducive to an assembly line approach (You can have any color you want – as long as it’s black – Henry Ford). The bureaucratic/assembly line/structuralist model IS conducive to the top-heavy administrations and inflexible unions.
That said, there are certain statutes to be followed and thus some centralization. I applaud the district for recognizing the disparities in IEP suspensions at different schools, re-setting the expectations, and seemingly allowing the schools to address the situation directly.
The potential lack of a consistent tardiness policy at three high schools in the same district is hardly an issue. If the primary goal is an enlarged alternative high school, then it would be wise to keep the focus there – rather than ranting against every little thing and spreading false rumors. But, hey, that’s just my opinion. Some will agree, some will disagree, and some won’t care.
Thanks, Laura, all of that does help me understand and accept your point of view. Jon, yes, that would be great if anyone would give us an indication that an enlarged alternative school is a focus. Should an alternative school ever materialize, then I would assume that discipline policies (and tardy policies) should be fairly uniform.
What I don’t get is why uniformity isn’t wise in a district this small. Just how different are the populations at the three high schools? This isn’t Chicago or San Diego with huge populations with students of vastly different economic backgrounds, etc.
Also, I would assume that the Special Ed director has much to do with helping the district recognize the disparities in IEP suspensions, etc.–but I understand (yet another rumor) that as of today, the interim director is gone, so now do we start over yet again–three times in one year? I guess, I’m asking who is in charge of setting and re-setting the expectations? Hopefully, it is someone with the training to do so.
Jon – I agree. Setting clear goals and objectives for principals and then providing some autonomy in how they are achieved would seem to be the correct approach.
Uniformity isn’t wise in this case because it’s unnecessary and because Randy is different from Steve and they’re both different from Sharon. And the teachers and staff at PCH, RHS and MHS are different. Because they’re all people. And they are the ones who have to enforce the rules. And you get a much better result if you let people make their own decisions, rather than forcing a policy on them. And rather than try and get 1000 people to agree as one big group, you break the group down into smaller groups.
Heck, I could care less if one teacher decided to give his/her students 1 tardy allowance before a detention, whereas the teacher in the room next door gave their students 3 allowances. For this issue, it’s basically whatever works for that teacher and agreed to by the principal.
And, if possible, involve the students.
“Belvidere High School students are getting more freedom to navigate their school during passing periods, but they’re being held to higher standards of responsibility in exchange.”
http://www.rrstar.com/news/yourtown/boone/x446580882/Revamped-tardiness-policy-praised-in-Belvidere
Oh, and Belvidere has two high schools (only one with this policy) and less students than District 150.
As for the alternative school – why do so many seemingly ignore the Knoxville Center, Greeley Safe School and Peoria Alternative High on Moss Ave? Greeley (and perhaps Knoxville, too) is part of the Regional Safe School Program (RSSP), authorized under the Illinois School Code. For those who like uniformity, what school districts in Illinois utilize an alternative school for disruptive students, other than the RSSP? What is wrong with the Greeley/RSSP model? If you want an alternative school so badly, why would you not look at what you already have and try and expand on it? Is a separate school necessary, or could the same goals be achieved through an alternative program within an existing school (and which may already exist)?
Frustrated – from a previous question, I didn’t see the movie yet – I hope to this weekend.
It is my understanding that Greeley is full. That may be old information though. Knoxville Center is only for middle school and is, also, full (I believe). PAHS has room, but one of the requirements to stay in that particular program is having a job with a minimum number of hours each week. The student has to turn in their hours on a weekly basis and if they fall below that minimum they are removed from PAHS. At least those were the rules last year. It has been my experience with that program that it is more of a last-ditch effort for a traditional school. It’s not quite a traditional school, but it’s not really an “alternative” either. It’s not alternative in the sense that Greeley or ICC Academy are.
Mama–all true; a true alternative school is not a dumping ground. Jon, I believe your idea was given some sort of name like “site-based management” in the 1990s. Manual was given considerable free reign–total disaster.
Which of the aforementioned schools is a “dumping ground”? Again, if you want an alternative school, why don’t you look at what Greeley is already doing and see if/how it can be expanded?
For a site-based model to work effectively, you also need to allow for there to be true choice in schools. Then the economics of supply and demand help dictate the approach taken by the school, including various policies and procedures of the individual schools.
Jon, I believe Greeley follows District 150’s curriculum–no innovations there. Also, it is a dumping ground–I believe most students there have been expelled from 150. They stay at Greeley until the expulsion is over; then they return to regular schools. I am not sure–I do believe some students may stay for the remainder of their high school years (after once assigned to Greeley). A vocational school should, also, be a high priority. Dr. Lathan has expressed agreement, but money is likely a problem. Your opinions are all based on some business-model solution (supply and demand). That’s the beginning point of our disagreement–it continues from there.
“I believe most students…” and “I am not sure” and “I do believe…”
YET, you declare Greeley to be a “dumping ground”. For me, here’s the beginning point of our disagreement – you typically don’t know what you are talking about, yet you criticize it anyway. (Let’s go to a board meeting and talk about a rumor that the tardiness policy has changed. Let’s state on the blogs that you believe it has, in fact, changed. Only later do you attempt to look it up and verify what the policy actually IS)
I would think that, especially, an educator, retired or otherwise, would understand the importance of educating themselves on a topic, prior to criticizing someone/something.
And the sad part is, sometimes your comments have real merit, but those are often lost among all of the gossiping and nit-picking.
Dr. Lathan just called me. She called to tell me that she had just learned that there is no district tardy policy. We had a very good conversation–she was very congenial, etc. I apologized for writing on the blogs without telling her, also, that I, too, had discovered there was no longer a tardy policy.
Jon, I gave her some of my hearsay information–labeled it as such. Also, she had put Bill Salzman and Tim Delinski on conference call to shed light on the situation. I did ask Bill when (as one of his employess before 2005) I was told that the tardy policy no longer existed. I am not certain what that answer was. I did tell Dr. Lathan that I believed (hearsay) that there are teachers who are not aware that there is no official policy. I asked if she thought it was time to let everyone know. I believe that she recognizes there is a communication problem and plans to fix it.
Jon, please keep in mind that I didn’t make up the information that I presented at the board. I had actually heard that teachers at a particular school had been told that tardiness no longer counted–obviously under the impression that the opposite had previously been true. (I believe that information is accurate). When I say, “I believe,” I often mean that I believe my sources–not just I believe in my own opinions or perceptions. Jon, you yourself express many opinions about District 150 and I have no idea from where you get your perceptions. People who know me have some fairly good ideas from where my information comes. If I have credibility with them, I am satisfied.
“I had actually heard that teachers at a particular school had been told that tardiness no longer counted–obviously under the impression that the opposite had previously been true.”
Did you hear FROM those teachers, or did you hear ABOUT those teachers? Do you know if they talked to their building principal about it (i.e. did they follow the “chain of command”)? But, hey, let’s just go straight to the top, and then mock the superintendent’s response, even though she reached out to you personally to address your concerns. And here I thought you favored structure and uniformity, but you can’t seem to follow Lathan’s simple plea to work through the system, along the chain of command.
“If I have credibility with (the people who know me), I am satisfied.” Shouldn’t you shoot for a higher standard? Shouldn’t you be concerned about the collateral damage you might do in the process? Or do the supposed ends justify the means? What benefit is gained from calling Greeley a “dumping ground”?
Lastly, since you previously asked to be “enlightened”, albeit about a different topic, here’s a link about ECONOMICS – so that you can understand both the similarities and distinctions from “Business Model”.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economics
I’ll even highlight a few key sentences for you.
“Economics is the social science that analyzes the production, distribution, and consumption of goods and services.”
“Economic analysis is applied throughout society, in business, finance and government, but also in crime,[3] education,[4] the family, health, law, politics, religion,[5] social institutions, war,[6] and science.[7]”
Isn’t public education, in some base form, a service that is produced/distributed and consumed?