Tuesday, March 3, 2009

Lack of responsiveness by PPS administration/board

On the March "Start a new post" Anonymous(s) wrote:

This PURE Reform forum has made 2 points crystal clear for me: 1) There are many, many people who are really concerned about the students and the future (or lack of) of PPSs, and that; 2)board members, administrators, and their boss don't read this blog, don't care to admit they read it or just think that they are smarter than the rest of us which gives them the right to make decisions that affect our children but not theirs.

March 3, 2009 8:17 PM

Anonymous said...

Like-mindedness tends to scare me. It tends to be dangerous, especially in these times. It's troubling that such an incredibly outrageous issue like the grading policy does not spark debate within administration itself. That alone tells me that we are dealing with a mindset and to me, it does not bode well for me or my kids.Don't discount arrogance. There is an ample amount to go around on Bellefield Avenue. That these folks actually believe they are above the fray is disconcerting.

March 3, 2009 9:10 PM

7 comments:

quixotix said...

How can we be sure there was no debate over the 50% procedure on Bellefield? As a parent, I have very limited knowledge of how the staff gets along, but for those in the admin who once taught in classrooms and know student behaviors to have been on-board with the 5-0, please say it ain't so. The boardmembers never had to vote on this because it was a procedure, not a policy, but don't bet there were not debates on the issue off-camera among them too.

The wheels do turn slowly. From the beginning the topic of the 5-0 was broght up at every parent meeting I attended.

Questioner said...

What type of parent meetings were these Quixotix and when?

Were they talking about a 5-0 scale at the same time they were debating enforecment of the 50% minimum, and was there any discussion about how these two policies are essentially the same?

quixotic said...

I am sorry to have not been more clear, blame the worst flu in many years. The 50% was brought up at every EFA and PSCC meeting I attended. Parents spoke about it in parking lots while waiting for kids. Called the hotline and sent mass emails. Some kids at one school printed t-shirts with a protest message.

Anonymous said...

Dont be so sure that board members and admin staff are unaware of this blog. Folks need to understand that the board and admin must think about what is best for the district as a WHOLE for the long term and are not able to cater to individual parents pet projects.

She said...

:::snort::: to that last comment. Part of running a successful district is listening to your customers. This administration pays lip service to that idea, but they haven't done it for real.

I could name so many different things in the last two years that have been changed/not worked/were scrapped by the administration. If they'd listened to parents (and students) and teachers, they could have saved themselves a lot of money and time.

In just the last week and a half, three different parents of older kids (mid to late HS and up) have told me that they're so glad to be done or nearly done. That they no longer tell people to put their kids in the PPS, that they feel badly for their friends with younger kids in the schools.

These are not just the parents we're accused of being here so often either -- the ones at the "good" schools with the "good" programs.

The administration better realize soon that the people affected aren't buying the propaganda. You can still fool the people who don't have kids in the schools, or don't know teachers, or only look at the headlines in the newspapers -- but even that won't last forever.

solutionsRus said...

In response to anon 9:27,

I surely hope the admin and board are looking at this blog and website, because most of us are concerned with just that, "the district as a whole", as opposed to the administration's pet projects (Sci tech, UPrep). We have been begging for over a year now for a comprehensive, district-wide, plan for both facilities and programs, but instead we get a piecemeal approach that results in missteps and poorly spent precious taxpayer's money.

Fours years into Mr. Roosevelt's tenure has brought no overarching recommendations for addressing the problems with underachieving students in our high schools (only a few facilities changes like Uprep and Sci tech) that addresses only a small percentage of High School students (what about Allderdice, langley, Carrick, Brashear, Oliver and Perry?!?). While many solutions, including replicating the successful 90/90/90 schools or reinstating the successful spartans classics program that was choked due to lack of funding, we are asked to support 6-12 schools that are proven to have no affect on academic or nonacademic performance and small schools that have also shown to be unsuccessful in and among themselves in improving student performance.

We are not asking for any special attention to be paid for parents "pet projects". We are asking for a seat at the table as concerned public school advocates.

solutionsRus said...

In response to anon 9:27,

I surely hope the admin and board are looking at this blog and website, because most of us are concerned with just that, "the district as a whole", as opposed to the administration's pet projects (Sci tech, UPrep). We have been begging for over a year now for a comprehensive, district-wide, plan for both facilities and programs, but instead we get a piecemeal approach that results in missteps and poorly spent precious taxpayer's money.

Fours years into Mr. Roosevelt's tenure has brought no overarching recommendations for addressing the problems with underachieving students in our high schools (only a few facilities changes like Uprep and Sci tech) that addresses only a small percentage of High School students (what about Allderdice, langley, Carrick, Brashear, Oliver and Perry?!?). While many solutions, including replicating the successful 90/90/90 schools or reinstating the successful spartans classics program that was choked due to lack of funding, we are asked to support 6-12 schools that are proven to have no affect on academic or nonacademic performance and small schools that have also shown to be unsuccessful in and among themselves in improving student performance.

We are not asking for any special attention to be paid for parents "pet projects". We are asking for a seat at the table as concerned public school advocates.