PPS has commissioned a half million dollar facilities study. While the study is sometimes referred to as an update of a study done about 10 years ago on the condition of PPS buildings, the facility review portion of this new study accounts for only $170,000 of the $498,000 cost of the study. A large part of the study is devoted to which programs should be located where.
Posters and flyers prepared by the district invite the public to a "City-wide Community Dialogue" about the study, to be held next week. They announce that "discussion at the City-wide Dialogue will focus on diversity, student travel time, school enrollment, high school, career tech, as well as other academic and facility topics."
Based on these flyers one might envision a panel of experts and decision-makers, presenting district observations on these topics and then conversing with and answering questions posed by community members. Alas, that is not the case. Rather, those attending the event will be given a 14 question scan-tron document to answer, with additional space to enter comments. Any discussion will be in a small group led by a facilitator. Transportation is provided by buses leaving specified locations 45 minutes prior to the event.
A question is how participants will view the time and effort asked of them in relation to the benefits obtained. As a practical matter someone using the district's transportation will spend about 4 hours in all. In return they will have the opportunity respond to a set of general questions that may have a very indirect relationship to their particular concerns.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
20 comments:
The questions to be asked at the community meeting to not seem to have been posted on the project website (www.pittsburghbuildingexcellence.com), so here some of them are.
__
1. I believe the following factors are a consideration for selecting a school to attend. Please fill in only ONE box per row (Strongly Agree, Agree, Disagree, Strongly Disagree, Don't Know):
A. The academic quality of the program
B. Proximity to your home
C. Your perception of the community where it is located
D. The amenities in the facility
E. The test scores of students in the school
F. Diverse student demographic make-up (race, socioeconomic, neighborhood, etc)
__
Do we really need a survey to tell us that academic quality is important in selecting a school? If so then missing from the list is another obvious concern: safety within the school. Yes, all of our schools should be safe schools, but unfortunately we are not there yet. And what about the depth and range of sports and extracurricular activities- this is a factor that for many is probably at least as important as amenities in the facility.
2. When you think about the value of diversity, what amount of time would you be willing to have your child travel in order to attend a school with students from different races and backgrounds? Please fill in only ONE box per row (15 minutes, 20 minutes, 45 minutes, 1 hour).
A. Elementary School Student
B. Middle School Student
C. High School Student
This question has the effect of pitting most peope's preference for close proximity, all other things being equal, against an interest they may have in diversity when that choice is not really relevant in Pittsburgh- most largely black neighborhoods are fairly close to neighborhoods with a significant white population. So why not just ask if the district should attempt to place programs and design feeder patterns in a way that is likely to result in diverse schools?
Moving on to the next question:
__
3. What amount of travel time would you be willing to have your child travel in order to attend a school with a specialized program such as a magnet or career technical education? Please fill in only ONE box per row (15 minutes, 30 minutes, 45 minutes, 1 hour).
A. Elementary School Student
B. Middle School Student
C. High School Student
__
Well that depends on the alternative, doesn't it? If your neighborhood feeder school is great you are less likely to travel an hour even to a very good magnet program than if your neighborhood school is one you would avoid at all costs. So, while survey results may reveal that people are "willing" to travel for 45 minutes, they might not reveal that this length of travel is something they would rather avoid.
PG article about this event:
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/09089/959246-298.stm
The article indicates that per the district spokesperson, discussions with community groups about issues such as future plans for Peabody and Westinghouse should continue while the consultants develop a facilities plan and help inform the work of those consultants.
The spokesperson also refers to community events on May 13 and 14 that will "focus on neighborhood needs." However, according to the consultants' schedule, at that point the consultants will have already developed options and the meetings will focus on asking attendees to rate those options.
Here's question 4:
__
What amount of time would you be willing to have your child travel in order to attend a school in a specific geographic area of the district? Please fill inonly ONE box per row (15 minutes, 30 minutes, 45 minutes, 1 hour).
A. Elementary School Student.
B. Middle School Student.
C. High School Student.
__
This question doesn't seem very relevant- while parents may be interested in a particular SCHOOL for their child, most parents do not seem to seek out a particular area other than their own neighborhood, which would not involve significant travel time, or perhaps for older students Oakland given the main library and museums.
Here is question 5:
__
I would rather adjust neighborhood school boundaries (feeder patterns) to ensure that school buildings have enough students attending to fill the school, rather than raise property taxes to maintain schools with empty seats. Please fill in only ONE box per row (Strongly Agree, Agree, Disagree, Strongly Disagree, Don't Know)
Elementary
Middle
High
__
This question avoids mentioning closing schools, although as a practical matter that is what often happens when feeder patterns are adjusted to fill empty seats. Also, it implies that schools with empty seats (how many empty seats?) can only be maintained by raising property taxes, rather than offering an option such as cutting administrative expenses. Finally it does not get to a key issue that arises when closing of a school is considered- should the well-being of the community be taken into account when deciding whether to close a school?
Question 6 is:
__
Some District schools are under enrolled. I would prefer... Please fill in only ONE box per row (Strongly Agree, Agree, Disagree, Strongly Disagree, Don't Know)
Operate buildings that are under enrolled even if they cost more
Redistrict school boundaries to better utilize facilities
Other
__
While there is a space to fill in "Other," why not specify the main alternatives to operating underenrolled schools even if they cost more, such as improving or placing attractive programs at the underenrolled schools rather than building additions onto other schools (such as Colfax and Concord). And how much more are we to assume costs would be? Answers would probably depend on this amount, preferably after considering added transportation costs resulting from redistricting.
Question 7 is:
__
When a school's enrollment becomes too low, it can no longer offer a variety of programs and services in a cost effective manner or in a comparable way to larger sized schools. If an ELEMENTARY (K-5) school student enrollment becomes smaller than its ideal size, I would prefer... Please fill inonly ONE box per row (Stronly Agree, Agree, Disagree, Strongly Disagree, Don't Know)
Students be transported to where the ideal size schools are
Students remain at neighborhood but receive less offerings than adequately sized elementary schools
Other
__
Many people may not know what if any programs and services are offered at the large elementary schools but not the small ones.
__
Questions 8 and 9 are the same as above but for Middle Schools and High Schools.
__
The new themed schools are relatively small and so it seems that the district has already determined that programs and services can be offered in a cost effective manner at small schools. Of course, there can be a level where enrollment is too low for the district to keep a school open regardless of questionnaire results, but again there is another alternative not offered on the form- offer programs that are attractive enough to lure back the many students choosing charter schools, or entice the many students who drop out to stay in school.
Question 10 is:
_
I would support having fewer comprehensive high school sin order to have one or more schools focused on career and technical programs (Strongly Agree, Agree, Disagree, Strongly Disagree, Don't Know)
__
The only option offered for someone wanting to show support for CTE, then, is to agree with the idea of having fewer comprehensive high schools. There is however the alternative of offering CTE within comprehensive high schools, so that students could opt in or out of CTE without having to change high schools and so that CTE students go to school with students with a range of academic interests (not just CTE). This alternative can be mentioned in the comments, but it requires an extra step and won't show up when results are tallied.
Just reading these questions and how they're worded tells you everything you need to know about what they're planning to do.
The questions also tell you that parent and community input isn't wanted or needed, but will only be used to say, "see, they agree with us" -- or it will be ignored by saying that parents and the community don't really understand the issues and details.
In light of She's comment, consider question 11:
__
I would prefer to reduce the number of neighborhood (feeder pattern) schools for more magnet/theme based options or duplicating successful magnet/theme based programs (Strongly Agree, Agree, Disagree, Strongly Disagree, Don't Know)
__
Again, to show support for a particular type of school (here magnet/theme based) it is necessary to endorse fewer neighborhood schools. Why not offer the option of placing more magnets or duplicating successful magnets in additional neighborhood schools?
Question 12:
__
I believe the School District of Pittsburgh should enter into partnerships with which of the following to expand learning and training opportunities for students. Please fill in only ONE box per row (Strongly Agree, Agree, Disagree, Strongly Disagree, Don't Know)
A. Technical College(s)
B. Other School District
C. Local Business/ Industry
D. Colleges and Universities
E. Non-Profits
F. Trade Unions
G. Other (Please explain in the comment box below)
__
If the district found a good opportunity at the right price for a partnership with industry, a college or a non-profit, it is probably safe to assume that most people would approve. This does not seem to qualify as one of the most important facilities questions facing our district or needing input from the public.
__
Question 13 is:
__
I believe community and/or non-profit organizations could share a facility with a school so long as the organization pays its fair share of capital, operating and maintenance costs.
__
There may be a specific arrangement being considered- maybe Connelly for CTE? It raises the issue of the new clearance requirements that have been imposed on anyone seeking to use space in a school, unless the organization including entry and parking areas are strictly sealed off- in which case it seems like this would be a mostly a question of renting out excess space.
Question 14:
__
I would prefer...
Please fill in only ONE box per row (Strongly Agree, Agree, Disagree, Strongly Disagree, Don't Know)
A. To build a new school instead of renovating, even if it costs more
B. To renovate the existing building, even if it costs more than building a new school
C. To relocate a program to an existing facility that meets the needs and has the available extra space
D. The more cost effective option
__
References in A and B to building a new school seem irrelevant to Pittsburgh- there is no chance of a new school building being constructed in Pittsburgh. And, when it comes to renovation, it is impossible to consider this question in a vacuum- are we considering renovation a treasured city tradition that will yield 50 - 100 years of use, or renovation of a poorly constructed building will not have anywhere near that useful life? And where does location fit into the picture? If location were not a concern then it would seem that choice C (relocate to another facility that meets needs and has extra space) would always be chosen and would also always be most cost effective. This question doesn't begin to get at the issues that come up in reality, such as the decision last year as to where to locate sci tech (ie, no option to choose "relocate to an existing building even if that choice will displace another program or programs").
I was at the facilities dialogue today, and it seemed that a great many of people filling out the questions were not city residents and did not have children in the city schools. And the questionnaire will be available on the web, apparently open to anyone from anywhere.
The consultants (and many of us) probably could have predicted with better than 90% accuracy what the results of these questions would be, given the way they were written. In other words, they were asking questions they already knew the answers to. As a result, the questions do not seem to represent a real quest for input.
I was also at the facilities dialogue meeting and several things struck me. The antendees at the meeting did not even come close to reflecting the PPS community (those actually being served by the PPS)
Sitting at our table:
3 parents
PPS facilities employee
Kimball employee
A+ Schools Board member
Representative from Mayors office
Peabody High School student
That comes to only 50% parent/student representation.
Other observations:
I believe that the PPS bussed in group of students.
1st hour of was taken up by Administraquion and consultant overview and then we were literally pushed through the process with very annoying overtalking and pressure from DeJong President.
Not quite sure of the appropriateness of having facilities and Kimball workers sitting at a table.
Only about 20-30% AA representation
Less than 25% parental representation (we should be able to check on actual demographics of attendees.
It has truly taken me a long time to become this cynical, but questioner's point is right on the money...these questions could be predicted with a high degree of accuracy without the show.
I was also at the facilities dialogue meeting and several things struck me. The antendees at the meeting did not even come close to reflecting the PPS community (those actually being served by the PPS)
Sitting at our table:
3 parents
PPS facilities employee
Kimball employee
A+ Schools Board member
Representative from Mayors office
Peabody High School student
That comes to only 50% parent/student representation.
Other observations:
I believe that the PPS bussed in group of students.
1st hour of was taken up by Administraquion and consultant overview and then we were literally pushed through the process with very annoying overtalking and pressure from DeJong President.
Not quite sure of the appropriateness of having facilities and Kimball workers sitting at a table.
Only about 20-30% AA representation
Less than 25% parental representation (we should be able to check on actual demographics of attendees.
It has truly taken me a long time to become this cynical, but questioner's point is right on the money...these questions could be predicted with a high degree of accuracy without the show.
The buses I saw arriving at the event were nearly empty.
I'm always suspicious when consultants go from city to city selling a similar service because you tend to get a canned, one size fits all result.
I saw this a few years ago when I volunteered with a nonprofit organization that had hired a "membership consultant." The outside consultants were on a tight prearranged schedule (both for their visit and the overall campaign). I assume that the first time they worked with a client there was some thought and real consideration of that client in their program, but by the time they reached my nonprofit everything was prepackaged. Take the schedule, take the templates, drop client's name in, tweak a little and voila, a campaign. The end result was a loss of money after paying the consultant, but no worry, the campaign had been funded by one of Pittsburgh's foundations so it wasn't "real money" that the non profit lost.
Correction. My cynicism got the better of me. The students that I saw at the facilities meeting were students from Peabody that came so that they could have a voice in what happens regarding programming at their school. Great job, kids. Hope someone is listening.
Post a Comment