Here’s an interesting report called “The Future of Education in Peoria: Issues and Opportunities for Moving Forward Together in Peoria Public School District 150.” It says it’s a report that came out of “A Community Summit in Open Space, June 3-5, 2002.” This three-evening forum was designed “to bring together concerned people from all across District 150 to create a shared vision for our public schools. The results of our work will provide the foundation for moving forward together.” Two hundred people attended this event.
Here’s a suggestion (p. 10) that came from a group composed of Mary Davis, Bette Johnson, Linda Millen, Herschel Hannah, Sean Matheson, Audrey Galter, and Sandy Farkash:
Longer day (7 55minute periods)
Note that Herschel Hannah is an Associate Superintendent, and Sean Matheson is a former school board member.
This suggestion came up again (pp. 27-28) in a group composed of Beth Koch, Gerry Brookhart, Pam Dolozychi, Sandy Burke, Martha Ross, Scott Russell, Don Johnson, and Herschel Hannah:
NOT ENOUGH TIME – Need to expand academic days to allow full “On Task” time for curriculum demands and Prevention services and programs; after school programs may not reach all children in need
- Longer school day/year
- Use of free periods
- Build prevention programs into existing curriculum ie. High School speech classes
- Saturday school
- Evening school
- Access to Early Childhood Education programs
Note attendees Martha Ross (current board vice president) and, once again, Mr. Hannah.
So, in 2002, one of the problems identified was that there was not enough time. And the solution was to come up with ways to provide more class time for students. What’s changed in six years that all of a sudden less class time is now suddenly a good idea?
Well, Dr. Simpson did say at the meeting last night that children today learn differently than they did ten years ago, so maybe the findings of a forum six years ago are no longer valid. Okay. We’ll forget about the 2002 report. Let’s look instead at the September 18, 2007, minutes of the joint school board/city council meeting — only about seven months ago:
Superintendent Hinton expressed that the District vision is to improve student achievement…. Mr. Hinton also discussed the need fort the District to offer “Choice” to parents, the need for a longer school day and/or longer school year.
He later clarified:
Council Member Nichting asked about the longer school day being for everyone. Superintendent Hinton explained that the longer day would be “need based.” He is still considering the need for a longer school year and noted that many students fall behind during the summer months.
And current board member Mary Spangler weighed in on the issue, too:
Board Member Spangler spoke to the Choice Edison Program and stated that the data she has seen shows that schools with longer days showed student improvement.
How do we reconcile these statements with Hinton’s new proposal to cut 45 minutes off the school day for twelve primary schools, but leave Edison school schedules intact? (And don’t tell me they can’t get out of the contract. Every spring the school board has an opportunity to get out of the contract by its own terms. That contract covers only four schools — three next year since Loucks is closing — and costs the district $1.14 million per year.)
How can the same administration in just seven months do a complete 180 on the issue of school day length? They now say, according to a handout distributed at the meeting last night, “Further study has revealed exciting best practices along with instructional and operational opportunities.” Ah, so perhaps all that data from the past 6+ years was totally bogus, and longer school days aren’t really all they’re cracked up to be. In fact, “further study” shows that the days should actually be shorter!
Well, in that case, all the more reason to cancel the Edison contract. Since their day is already longer than the rest of the district’s, shortening it to five hours and forty-five minutes will surely produce even more academic improvement.
District 150’s logic is like a Penrose triangle.
This is why I moved to Metamora. Peoria’s inept city council and just-as-inept school board left me feeling very uneasy about the future of my kids and what I would have to face as a resident. I lived and supported Peoria all my life until 4 years ago, and then I just came to the realization that I could not be in the middle of these morons any longer.
[trackback]
I elected these school board members to do what’s in the best interest of my children. I also thought with all their education and background they could come up with something a little more creative than saving money by cutting the school day. Shouldn’t this be the last resort?
Parents need to show up at the board meetings to voice their concerns. A meeting at Kellar simply isn’t going to cut the mustard.
No worries, ImaSwede. Parents will make a healthy showing at the board meeting. Details to follow..
Just be reddy to be called “a vocal minority” by some on the board. I have had that done.
Dear ImaSwede and diane vespa,
Ohhhhh how I want to believe both of you, but sorry, I’m too old and have seen too much of the BOE at 150 over the last 40 years to hold my breath. Past BOEs can be damned by their actions in hindsight, but it’s only the current one that needs attention and direction to save Peoria’s children from ruin. Will it happen? Oh, maybe a few parents will attend a board meeting – but it’s a meeting where the board won’t pay attention anyway. They call it their “duty” to put up with input that night from the public! Afterall that misfit want-to-be board “knowes” want they THINK is proper. Sometimes their opinion has been misguided by the PJS editor-idiot-de-jour or the lame brained, double talking King Hinton. About the only thing that anybody can give Hinton any credit for is having moved out of the Peoria 150 tax base years ago! Guess that doesn’t speak well for the other three associate and assistant superintendents! But – I give them credit – they know what a gravy train 150 is…but so do hogs!
Otherwise why this BOE extended Hinton’s contract is anybody’s guess!
Nite nite, Hinton – you pathetic loser!
^oo^~
Funny thing is that District 150 Reps keep saying that a lot of the teachers and parents are supportive of this plan. Where are they?? I’ve only seen one or two to hundreds that are opposed. Please, chime in here. Anon pseudonyms don’t count. If you have a legitimate opinion, you shouldn’t fear putting your name to it! I’m waiting…
I voted for Beth Akeson who would have been a change agent for the D150 BOE.
Diane: Whittier parents were effective in turning the tide when Whittier was on the chopping block in D150’s Master Facilities Plan. So, get organized and get your people out and prepared to keep showing up at any and every meeting and speaking out.
One feral kat brings up an interesting question, why did the BOE renew Hinton’s contract? What were the goals that he did not meet in his last contract?
D150 is simply on the wrong path and without a change at the helm, only a miracle will save it.
Letter I sent to all District 150 board members:
Also, I posted this on Diane Vespa’s site, but wanted to reiterate it here:
C.J. I am confused. What 12 schools will have their hours shortened? Will the new Glen Oak birth through 8th grade school have shortened hours? Or is that a “special” school? I believe this is all a guise to reduce the hours of the schools meeting State standards, while all underperforming primary schools will end up having “specialized” programming necessitating longer hours. This is just another example of District 150 channeling funds to failing schools at the expense of the rest of the schools.
I think the suggestions for cost savings set forth in your letter to the Board are great but there may a few more to consider. Maybe Glen Oak should be K through 8. If the District is operating at such a deficit that it cannot afford to educate the existing students K through 4 on a full-day basis, they do not need to take on any more than they are legally mandated to do. Also, perhaps plans for the Manual Academy need to be scaled back. At the end of the day it appears that the District always has money to do what it wants to do.
The assertion that uninterrupted blocks of learning will enhance student performance is not what parents should be challenging. The District said they were sticking with the Edison plan because they wanted to offer “choice.” I would argue that parents at Whittier, Charter Oak, and Kellar should have the “choice” to keep music, p.e., art, and science programs intact. ISAT performance is fine at these schools and maybe what is best for these students is education of the whole child and not blocks of uninterrupted learning. It seems it is all well and good to have specialized programs for underperforming schools, but enhancement, or in this case, maintenance of existing programs at higher performing schools seems to be taboo. Why?
Having children that are recent alums of Kellar Primary, I can tell you the first thing they used to talk about after school is what they did in music, gym, art or science. They also loved their weekly visits to the library and other extras that the school worked into the schedule from time to time. Will those go by the wayside as well? The aforementioned subjects were not offered everyday, but when they were, my kids were so excited to go to school because their day was going to be a little more exciting and different. Learning is so much about keeping children engaged and in the game. The teachers that teach these classes have specialized knowledge that the regular classroom teacher does not. I fail to see how the District can offer the same level of quality in its instruction by shrinking the school day and eliminating trained professionals.
CJ, remember at the meeting on Thurs. Ms. Sanfilip kept refering to the “best Practices” model. I’m wondering if this is what she was referring to:
http://www.nga.org/portal/site/nga/menuitem.8274ad9c70a7bd616adcbeeb501010a0/?vgnextoid=e9e8fbc137400010VgnVCM1000001a01010aRCRD
If so, I see nothing in there about a shorter school day and cuts in specialist teachers..although there was a great “how to” link regarding a school district take-over here:
http://www.sedl.org/pubs/policy91/policy91.pdf
Karrie, Beth Akeson was present at this meeting also. I hope she hangs in there..perhaps she’ll get another shot at it.
And to think that the recall issue was just voted down by the Illinois Senate. UGH!
Why is recall being decided in the legislature anyway? It is a people’s right and should be done by petition or referendum. Any one in charge of their own salaries isn’t going to vote to have themselves recalled. Duh. This is the same legislature that Monday said : If the law doesn’t say you CAN do something, then you can’t.
“Anon pseudonyms don’t count. If you have a legitimate opinion, you shouldn’t fear putting your name to it! I’m waiting…
Left by diane vespa on May 2nd, 2008”
… and I am taking down names and …
Does the Board even get a say? See this from Monday’s agenda:
“14. PRIMARY SCHOOL SCHEDULE – Sanfilip
Proposed Action: That the student and teacher schedules for all Primary Schools, except Franklin Edison, Northmoor Edison, Roosevelt Magnet and Valeska Hinton Early Childhood Education Center, for the 2008-2009 school year shall be as follows:
1. Student Schedule 9:15 A.M. to 3:00 P.M.
2. Teacher Schedule 8:15 A.M. to 3:15 P.M.
The Superintendent is authorized to make such individual Primary School accommodations/variations to this schedule and any necessary Middle School changes to accommodate this schedule as he may deem necessary. Such changes shall be reported to the Board of Education. This school schedule shall be for the 2008-2009 school year. During the month of April, 2009, the Superintendent shall make a further or permanent Primary School schedule recommendation to the Board of Education.”
Did you catch the first sentence of the last paragraph? The superintendent (Hinton) is authorized to do this, assumably on a temporary basis. I don’t even know if the Board has the power to vote. Next April, he gets to make a “permanent” recommendation, and maybe then they get to vote. I’ve been around government long enough to know that once a budget cut is made, it never comes back. I say we show up anyway, but I’d love to hear some clarification on the rules (Prairie Celt, One Feral Kat?).
The whole public school system in #150 and elsewhere across the U.S. is obsolete.
Facts: District #150 has a budget of $160 million administrated by educators.
Fact: The Superintendants position should be held by an experienced highly paid person with a Doctorate in Finance and Business Management.
Facts: The school board does not have a person skilled in business on the board. Doctors, housewives, and stock brokers are not skilled in the management of an $160,000,000,00 (and rapidly growing) business.
Fact: The school board, now unpaid, should consist of no more than 3 full time highly paid board members appointed by a committee of 5 to 7, of responsible and proven citizens. The committee members would be chosen by leaders who live in #150 Districts. The committee would include the presidents of the Neighborhood Associations and each PTO. The largest business in the city should have one automatic representative who they would appoint.
Facts: The school board term is 5 partime years with no pay.
Fact: Three years is long enough rotating one new member per year (by draw as who is first and second to leave)
Facts: Our current system isn’t working and hasn’t worked in years. Educators do not have the skills to run big business.
Fact: Educators could spend all their time on “educating kids” and still hold well paying most responsible positions.
Fact: 75% of the kids who leave Peoria for higher education, will not return. 85% of the kids who do not continue on to higher education will stay in the area. Hmmmm.
The present system isn’t working. Try starting here and see where these thoughts I have had for a long time (and posted on my blog site)take us.
We live in a world highly resisitant to change in the way we educate our kids. Start changing soon or it will be too late and we will go the way of other former world powers.
I have to agree with Merle. The District should be run by business people. Let the educators do their job and money people do theirs. We’d be a whole lot better off. Running the District should not be a position of power, but a position of responsibility.
How about just take the money out of the system? Give education vouchers to the parents of students and let them decide where to spend their money. Allow people who want to teach develop their own schools and curriculum… you know… let teachers teach and let students learn.
Then elect some responsible business people to the school board.
BMW — The twelve schools this would affect are: Charter Oak, Garfield, Glen Oak, Harrison, Hines, Irving, Thomas Jefferson, Kellar, Kingman, Tyng, Whittier, and Woodrow Wilson.
It would not affect Franklin Edison, Northmoor Edison, Roosevelt Magnet School, or the Valeska Hinton Early Childhood Education Center “due to their program design.”
And I agree there are lots of unexplored possibilities that should be considered before they even consider cutting the school day. I only listed a few for starters.
I think when whoever speaks at the board meeting Monday evening, they should leave Edison out of it. Lets stick to the issue at hand. Complaining about Edison will only diffuse our points.
Chris Setti: The BOE has to vote on this change because techincally it is a change in the learning environment (curriculum as it is delivered, altering the instructional delivery time and length of the school day) and the superintendent does not have the authority to make a decision of that magnitude. NOTE: does anyone know if the district or BOE has approached the ISBE for approval to implement these changes because they are decreasing instructional time in a district that is not making AYP? Why is the ROE’s office standing by and not questioning why this is being done?
Item 14 is a part of the Deliberation Agenda for the Monday BOE meeting. This means Hinton is recommending this action be approved by the BOE. It will be voted on separately and should have its own discussion after a motion is made and seconded. Unless significant public pressure is brought to bear (and this is unlikely since Hinton publicly stated he usually doesn’t listen to what the community thinks, and Stowell said the parents who expressed concern over this proposal were close-minded & argumentative), and the item deferred to a future meeting, it will be voted on Monday night.
This is a major decision and should have been discussed by the BOE for a considerable length of time. Last meeting Hinton clearly stated it was just an idea (hastily handwriten on note paper and presented by Tim Ryon) and now just 2 weeks later, it is on the agenda for a vote. The repercussions and community/student impact can’t have been very thoroughly considered or researched in such a short time. Or were they and the publice kept in the dark and deceived for months?
This rush to approval is a real affront to the students, parents, staff and members of the Peoria community because these “misguided” board members and administrators are making ill-conceived decisions based on balancing a budget when they have no problem paying top administrators large salaries with generous raises. Or maybe their answer will be to close more buildings – what a proud legacy they will have. These decisions will have a negative impact on this community for a very long time.
I agree with Ms. Vespa. I don’t think Edison is the issue in this argument. In fact, I think it strenghthens the position of those families that do not want to see the school hours cut. The Edison program was continued because the Board wanted to offer a “choice” and many families were supportive of it and so it remains, even though it is more costly.
How it is any differnt now that parents at Kellar, Charter Oak, wherever are saying “no” we feel it is important that the primary schedule and curriculum remain the same.
Why can the District find the money for some programs and not others?
In terms of the recall, the reason the state legislature had to vote on it first was because this would amend the state Constitution: first, 3/5 of each House had to approve the statute in order for it to show up on the November ballot. Once it’s on the ballot, either 3/5 of those who actually vote for the measure have to approve it OR a majority of the total number of voters has to approve it in order for it to become an amendment to the Constitution.
But in spite of this move by the Senate, all is not lost. In November, there will be a question on the ballot asking the general public if there should be a new Constitution (the one under which the State of Illinois operates was ratified in 1970 and has been amended 10 times). If the same votes that were mentioned above are achieved, a committee will be formed to write a new Constitution. The recall amendment is just one of many being considered.
Merle and SD,
Question: Where would you have placed Schock… educator, business man or dufus? What are you people expecting from a District/City that votes someone like Aaron Shock in as a District Super? Now you want to make him a U.S. Congress[man]?
Anyway, I don’t know if District 150 admin should be run completely by business types. You say let educators educate, but inevitably, the ‘suits’ and the teachers will rub each other the wrong way. The next thing you know, you will have Six Sigma idiots running around, making six figures, causing another teachers strike!
I know we do not live in a perfect world, but it would be nice to find someone with a little business savvy, possessing an understanding of education and its philosophical foundations.
Edison is an issue only insofar as it exposes the administration’s inconsistency on two issues:
Why are our children paying the price for these bungling idiots that can’t balance the budget? This is going to have a very long and profound effect on the students. More latch key children and more children deprived of music and art education, which is very important to developing well rounded individuals. We’ve lost a lot of PE in schools and now music and art. What a great society we are raising. Half time kids so some fat cat can carry a big salary and move the kids and their parents around like puppets. People get together and fight this thing big time. Call in the media and tell them you don’t like it. Find a way to recall these people and get this stopped asap.
New Voice,
Aaron was elected to the BOE then the BOE selected him for Board President not the Superintendent.
SD: Why you ask? Why? Because they (the State, School Board, Administration) don’t care a lick about educating your children. They know they can do little about it, but there is so much stinking money thrown at them to pretend to try, that well, they pretend to try.
As one of my students wrote: “School. Oh how I hate it. It seems to me school is a broken toy…I often find school doesn’t teach me anything I didn’t already know. I hate school because it’s usually taught to the level of the dumbest person in the room.”
You are very correct. My mistake….., but I will not admit it here where the world can see.
Now I will have to slander you as well.
This is Mary Spanglers position on the issue.. as forwarded to me by another Mom. What do you guys think?
Mr. Hinton was originally thinking of a pilot program, before the
> state funding issue came up, that would send the kids home one
> afternoon a week or twice a month. This is a trend that is proving to
> be successful. This would allow the teachers to have the planning
they
> need to review data. I like this idea because of the consistency and
> the opportunity to provide after school activities in the morning.
> I don’t know how familiar you are with the benchmarking system but it
> is amazing. However, the time to review and plan is essential for
> maximizing the benefits. I am a former teacher (in Chicago Catholic
> school and Peoria Von Steuben) and really had a wonderful experience
> with team-teaching. Integrating the curriculum with themes and trying
> to engage the children was what it was all about. Now I look back and
> wish I had the data available that they have now. I don’t see how one
> planning period a week could provide all that is needed. We are
moving
> to a comprehensive system of support (you know, RTI) and the meeting
> time fits right into the plan as well. If Kellar uses that first hour
> to expand their Spanish program or offer Chinese, I think it could be
> outstanding. Sure I don’t want to shorten the day but we can’t
> lengthen it until we negotiate the next contract and we better have
> the money to start paying teachers more for it. I think the common
> planning time, considering all the data that teachers now have at
> their fingertips, is more important than the extra minutes. To me, it
> is all about teaching to the individual child. There are so many kids
> at Kellar that are already in the exceeds category that with this
> option, the data can be reviewed and students can better be taught at
> their own levels instead of more review for ISAT. The opportunities
> for inclusions and team teaching with small group/large groups would
> be easier to implement as well. I did not like this idea at all at
> first and then I looked into the research thought about the options
> and also asked some of my favorite teachers. You may be surprised but
> there are some Kellar teachers in support of the change but don’t
want
> to come out because of all the anger that is out there. We want
people
> to try it for a year. As far as a pilot, this is the pilot. If it
> works, we will want to expand it to our middle schools but negotiate
a
> longer day for all. Personally, I would rather have my kids go to
> school 4 days a week with lesson plans that can meet their individual
> needs, whether they be interventions or enrichment, than 5 days with
> less collaboration. Integrating subjects, thematic teaching and
> project based learning are all things that gifted schools use and I
> feel keep all kids engaged. We need more of this in the traditional
> classroom. I just wish people would give it a chance before they
> closed their minds to it.
>
> Dr. Simpson was a very respected principal and Charter Oak became a
> Blue Ribbon School under his leadership. He held the position of
> Director of Special Education before he retired. Some people I spoke
> with changed their minds when they heard this was his idea. He has
> only good intentions for the district and the children. Mr. Hinton
has
> been all over the country and was responsible for setting up Valeska
> Hinton and a successful charter school out in D.C.. I wish everything
> had been presented differently and at some schools, it has been. I
> spoke with a teacher from Hines who is very excited about it but she
> thrives on data and teaming and wants more time for it. She has seen
> the results this year because Hines is in their second year with
> benchmarks. Other cost cutting options will have to be continued to
be
> looked at because we are going to need to pay for the longer days if
> we can negotiate it. As far as Edison, we are under contract until
> 2009. By staying with the
> contract, we were able to obtain the benchmarks, which are the best
in
> the country, at no charge for our non-Edison schools. I don’t know
> what will happen in the future.
>
> I did speak with Dr. Mary O’Brian, Director of Special Education to
> get her opinion. You may know her or had heard of her. She used to
> teach at ISU so if you know anyone who had her, I would be surprised
> if they didn’t respect her. She worked for the state to implement
RTI
> before she came her. This was her first full year with us. She
> feels that the plan will benefit special education and the new
> Comprehensive system of support we are implementing throughout the
> district.
>
> Now my big issue is about supporting parents so that the time works
> without it being costly. Considering there is already a latchkey
> program in place, maybe the 45 could be at a very low cost like $1 a
> day. Aides and one-on-ones won’t need to be there but may want to
pick
> up some money be supervising the computer lab or library. I know
> some schools, breakfast will actually help because the kids can come
> and eat. We should look into an early activity bus for the primary
> schools.
>
> My father was a teacher, two out of three brothers are teachers and
> all three brothers married teachers. I went to 16 years of Catholic
> schools. I left private schools for District 150 and I would never
go
> back. I have 4 children in District 150, one in high school, 2 in
> middle and 1 in pre-school.
>
> Sincerely,
> Mary Spangler
>
It suddenly occurred to me that maybe I should not have posted that letter. If I violated copyright or some code of ethics then CJ please take it down. Thanks.
Spangler is addressing, very specifically, the parents of Kellar students who are making AYP. This student population may be able to handle the shorter day and not suffer a decline in their ISAT scores.
But what about the primary schools that are not making AYP? You can’t compare the needs of a school whose student population is meeting or exceeding AYP with a school where only a small percentage of the student population is meeting AYP. A “one size fits all” solution won’t work here.
I find her argument that “. . . Sure I don’t want to shorten the day but we can’t lengthen it until we negotiate the next contract and we better have the money to start paying teachers more for it . . .” to be specious because the length of the teacher work day is determined by the collective bargaining agreement and any change to those negotiated hours – either lengthening or shortening – must be bargained. If they can open special collective bargaining to shorten the work day then they can just as easily open special collective bargaining to lengthen the work day. Sorry, that argument just doesn’t fly.
A further misrepresentation is found in her statement that “. . . Mr. Hinton
has been all over the country and was responsible for setting up Valeska
Hinton and a successful charter school out in D.C. . . .” Valeska Hinton was built and “set up” under the leadership of Dr. John Strand, former superintendent. Hinton was the principal at Harrison during the planning for, and construction of, the center and was not named as the principal of the ECEC until it was nearly completed. The successful charter school and the extensive travel she mentions occurred when Hinton worked for Edison and had all their resources and models supporting him.
The benchmark system she refers to that comes with the Edison contract (at no charge) and “which are the best in the country,” is the Tungsten system. It is a matter of opinion whether or not they are the “best in the country.” Some curriculum specialists (with specialized degrees and depth of experience) I spoke with dispute this allegation. There are many benchmarking systems out there and each has its strengths and weaknesses, but Tungsten is the one the district is getting for free (never mind the $1M+ cost of the Edison contract to the taxpayers).
I found her comment that aides and one-on-ones (special ed attendants) won’t need to be present for the additional 45 minute latchkey program. If staff isn’t present, who will be watching the kids for 45 minutes? She said they may want to earn extra money by supervising the computer lab or library. She speaks of an expanded breakfast program and an additional activity bus. These program additions cost money and are not inexpensive. Does the district really know the cost of running an expanded latchkey program at all the primary schools? The additional expense will certainly offset the savings anticipated by eliminating prep period teachers, especially if the district subsidizes the cost to the parents. The BOE & public really needs to have a better idea of these costs before a final vote is taken.
I found it rather interesting that Hinton had been considering a pilot program that would send the kids home early one afternoon per week. This seems to support my early question of whether or not Hinton had been considering something along these lines and kept the public in the dark for some time.
The bottom line to this whole issue is the rush to implementation. I realize it is the first week of May, but why can’t the BOE and the administration take the time to talk with parents and other constituents? Why are they in such a big hurry to ram this “one year pilot program” down the public’s throat?
Diane- Thanks for posting Mary Spangler’s letter.
Ken Hinton and Hershel Hannah have added company in the “I Cant’ Speak or Write” club. Eee gads!!
Diane and any others planning on attending the BOE meeting tomorrow night:
Is anyone going to ask the BOE and administration for a copy of the alleged research (or at the very least a Bibliography of the sources they cite) supporting their statements that the children will learn more by attending school a shorter period of time? If not, someone definitely should, to put them on the spot. If they deny the request, then you can file a FOIA request – they’ll have to respond to that. It will be interesting to see if they can produce any supporting research, and if they can, and who conducted the research. If you get anything, perhaps CJ can post it for everyone to read and check out.
Just a thought . . .
BRAVO PrairieCelt!
As always you have posted a logical, thought provoking response. This time you took on an elected 150 BOE member who is so entrenched in the Hinton camp that she can’t typically see what she is rubber stamping time and time again.
One thing that should be repeated was your earlier question as for whether or not the ISBE has approved this plan. District 150 is under severe scrutiny for multiple reasons. Just how this knee-jerk change for SAKE OF MAKING BUDGET can be implemented is beyond me. Furthermore “making budget” so as to trigger an alleged contractual bonus for Hinton really makes this wide spread change even more suspect, doesn’t it?
^oo^~
As you know, I sent a letter to all the board members. I have not heard from Mary Spangler, but I have heard from a few others. Here are their responses in the order I received them.
Debbie Wolfmeyer:
Rachael Parker:
Jim Stowell:
My thanks to everyone who responded.
[quote]Is anyone going to ask the BOE and administration for a copy of the alleged research (or at the very least a Bibliography of the sources they cite) supporting their statements that the children will learn more by attending school a shorter period of time? [/quote]
I’m on it!
Thanks, Diane – it’s important for the public trust issue.
Some of the information provided in Mary Spangler’s letter is news to me. I am concerned about these before school enrichment programs that are supposedly going to be available. Who is going to coordinate them, how are they going to work, and who will pay for them? As a parent volunteer I coordinated a before school Spanish program for Kellar and it was a problem in the long run. The staff that taught the program were not District 150 but BU college students that were recruited. If one of the BU student called in sick I had no back up (unlike if it was a District teacher and they could call someone on the substitute list). Also parents did not take it seriously and kids did not regularly attend or came late to class. Parents had to pay for this before school program and luckily we had a generous parent that paid for those students who could not afford it. And of course, transportation was a problem for some, because parents had to drop their children off to attend this program. The program was not continued the next year but I was uncertain how we were going to adjust for those that had exposure to the language v. those that were new.
I think expanding the school day to some degree in order for primary students to begin learning a second language sounds great for some schools but a piecemeal before school approach is not going to work in the long run, unless the District devotes a lot of resources to it and then . . . where are the savings. It just does not add up on so many different levels.
I agree BMW. How you can embellish “latch key” is beyond me. What a creative school board we have!
I received another reply this morning. This is from board president Dr. David Gorenz:
Thanks for the response.
“Then elect some responsible business people to the school board.
Left by mahkno on May 3rd, 2008”
Why a school board at all? What is the point?
mahkno and kcdad,
Years ago the movers and shakers in Peoria did choose to be board members and served with pride. Also the corporate powers were represented such as Cat, CILCO and banks. Have no doubt about it – the times have changed! Look at the current make up let alone the BOE for the last 10 years. Sorry, but these are not movers and shakers!
As for why having a board? Even now Hinton has too much power in that the BOE merely rubber stamps his decisions, but to have no board would be wrong! You need an oversight group of intelligent interested people period!
^oo^~
I would love to know what Jan Deissler really thinks of all of this… This evening’s meeting should be an interesting one indeed! Go Diane!!!
ImaSwede – why don’t you phone Jan Deissler and ask her what she thinks about this? She is very approachable and, as an educator, very knowledgable.
ofk….. I see your point, but if there is no district to supervise, only neighborhood schools, run by principals competing for enrollment… then there is no need for superintendents and no need for school boards. All you need is parents… I think that was the whole point of PTAs, wasn’t it?
Dfr. Gorenz: “However I understand the concern you express.”
One would hope so. We are using the English language, after all.