Why?
One speaker quoted from our blog, although the quote was misattributed to our friends at Be the Change. While we appreciate the fact that our blog is being read, the way in which it was quoted was misleading. The speaker quoted from our "We're Back... Unfortunately..." post on 11/3/14, where we stated that the Code of Conduct, Character and Support was "abysmally implemented" thus far. The speaker neglected to also highlight (from the same blog post):
- that we believed that the Code was borne out of wonderful, powerful ideas and philosophies;
- our concern with the lack of personnel and funding to properly implement the Code of Conduct, Character and Support, as it was intended;
- we are also concerned that most schools do not have staff trained in using Restorative Justice techniques;
- our request that each of us closely watch how the Code of Conduct, Character and Support is actually being implemented and ask ourselves if we really believe that it will nurture and teach students in the SCSD how to behave in society at the level they need to be successful.
Actions...
The district's roll-out of the Code has been lacking in both timely and substantive actions, in spite of the fairy tale that was woven in the Superintendent's remarks last night. And this is where more people in the audience were perplexed. After visitors were allowed to speak, the Superintendent made her remarks. And last night it became crystal clear why the agenda is set up that way.
Because this way, no one can call attention to her
misrepresentations or omissions,
including:
- While foster grandparents are in place at most schools, that is a recent development. And already at least one has been punched.
- 180+ community partners in the buildings. This is not all new personnel! Some of these organizations have had staff in the buildings for years. Sort of like re-gifting...
- More than 200 people attended the Keeping Kids in School Community Summit. That's news to many, as we've not heard an estimate higher than 125 actual attendees. And many of those were politicians and community agency representatives... BUT, let's suppose that all 200 attended AND they were all parents interested in keeping their kids in school. That still represented less than 1% of the entire student body. When examined statistically, it doesn't seem to be the rousing success that was hailed last night...
- Students have been trained in the Code of Conduct. Indeed, they have. What was omitted was the fact that the training didn't take place until TWO MONTHS into the school year. Or that at some grade levels, the scripted lessons included exercises in learning their classmates' names, as if they hadn't done that in the first two weeks... Or that most teachers didn't receive the lessons until a day or two before they had to present them, giving them inadequate time to become familiar with the material.
- While referrals and suspensions statistics are virtually the same year-over-year, no one mentioned the fact that Level 1 offenses are no longer referrals. Instead they are now "Observation Notes" that no one is reporting on. If one added all of the "Observation Notes" to the statistics to present a true year-over-year behavioral snapshot, we'd see a picture of a district spiraling out of control.
Now some questions for the Board President...
- Why are one or two audience members consistently allowed to comment disrespectfully to speakers they disagree with?
- Why is one Board Member allowed to smile and nod assent to the speakers they agree with, while smirking and laughing at those with whom they do not?
- Why are those speakers whose positions favor the Superintendent allowed to consistently exceed their allotted time, while those who do not always agree are generally kept closer to the three minute limit.
One can only hope that maybe
next month will be better...
next month will be better...
Why is this going on? All anyone has to do is google "the Broad Foundation Superintendents' Academy," and they will see the pattern. Contreras is a graduate of this academy. Prospective superintendents are taught to break down their school districts -- use outside groups to create conflict in the district, reduce the number of staff members who actually work with students, while increasing the superintendent's personal staff, create "churn," or turnover in the district --- make smart, experienced teachers and principals who care about their jobs miserable enough to quit or take early retirement. It's easier than firing them. Demonize the teachers; the problems in the district are all the fault of lazy, incompetent, racist teachers! Make the district's schools places that nobody would ever want to work at, or send their kids to.
ReplyDeleteWhy would a superintendent want to do this to their own district? Wouldn't that be trashing their own career, along with the district? Actually, no. The point is to make the public schools so horrible that people will willingly accept -- even ask for -- privatization and charters. The Broad foundation and their supporters will then find the superintendent a nice position in the charter or foundation world.
But if this is what's happening, why isn't the news media picking up on it? That's part of the script too....in cities where Broad-trained superintendents are taking the school district apart --- the news media has nothing to say about it.
Everything is going along precisely according to the Broad script. Injured teachers, good kids suffering in violent, chaotic schools....the Broad people will get what they want, so what do they care about the kids and the teachers?
Would that Board member be Derrick Dorsey...why yes! Wasn't it rumored that his campaign was run from the Superintendent's office...why yes! Does he outwardly demonstrate his support for Ms. Billue, Ms. Jones, Ms. Chang, Mr. Dixie, Ms. Contreras, and all Contreras supporters...why yes! Does the Board president allow this...why yes! Does Dorsey sneer and shake his head when a non-Contreras supporter speaks...why yes!
ReplyDeleteJust another level of the unprofessional manner in which some members of the SCSD community are allowed to behave.
I'm not buying the Broad Foundation explanation. Wouldn't charters and private schools mean that disruptive students would be kicked out (or never let in)? Since when did the far Left (Contreras, the Syracuse Board of Ed., the AG, Miss Twiggy, Say Yes and all their friends in the media) ever express support for Charter schools?
ReplyDeleteThe union is partly to blame here by caring more about the bottom line than about their members safety. And the education of children who want to learn is ever farther down their list.
Some people on the syracuse.com message boards have it right. Video evidence of all the disruptions and violence should be collected and made available to the public. Forget about the Post Standard doing their job and investigating this. They are on the Superintendent's side.
Well, only Sharon really knows for sure what Sharon's true agenda is, but she is an alumna of the Broad Academy -- which hasa strong charter/privatization agenda, AND her actions so far have fit the pattern of other Broad-trained superintendents....who've pushed their districts toward privatization and charters. And don't the new Latin School and the new Fowler more or less operate as charters?
ReplyDeleteI do agree with you on the union and videos. WHY are the union leaders so silent when staff and students are stuck in dangerous, violent conditions? Kate McKenna did not hesitate to take Stephen Jones to task for far less than this. It's clear -- the union, the school board, politicians, the media will do absolutely nothing about this. Waiting for them to is useless.