On another post Anonymous wrote:
Pittsburgh Public Schools Releases New Estimates for Schenley ...
Pittsburgh Public Schools
Superintendent
Linda Lane released new estimates today for the repair of Schenley High
School, gathered at the request of the ...
http://www.pghcitypaper.com/Blogh/archives/2013/02/15/pittsburgh-public-schools-releases-new-estimates-for-schenley-repairs
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
20 comments:
The estimates the administration arranged for throw in all sorts of extras; not just air conditioning, but brand new lockers (why not just return the ones they moved to Reizenstein), removing ceilings (why, now that we know the plaster is not asbestos containing), expensive new signs (didn't do that at Peabody), expensive new outdoor lighting (ditto). The Board resolution was for Board members to have the scope of service to review in advance so that excessive items could be cut. The administration simply ignored that directive- not a good precedent. It is also strange that the huge expense of renovation was at the time of closing attributed to asbestos, but now that we know there is little asbestos the estimate has barely budged. It is essentially a "like new" renovation; a similar figure would apply to make Peabody "like new" as well.
And again, no explanation is offered as to why a totally different use (apartments) would cost half as much as a renovation for the same use (a school). Apartment renters will not be purchasing their own kitchens, baths, etc. so this is not a situation where the residential contractor is providing just a shell.
One of PPS' slogans this year is to become the school (or district) of first choice. If the District truly believes that the changes they have made and are making are going to make people move back into the city or return from charter schools, where will they put the new students? Any work on Schenley would have to be cheaper than building a new school, and no new school building would be of the quality of the Schenley building. Selling Schenley is pretty much accepting that the District really does not believe in what it is doing.
True, since it is difficult to "believe in what it is doing" would mean that they KNOW what they are doing. It is abundantly clear that the PPS District does NOT KNOW what to do at any level. . . NOT financially, NOT academically, NOT behaviorally, NOT intellectually, NOT culturally, NOT creatively, NOT progressively, NOT by any STANDARD.
The selling of Schenley, the closing of school after school, the hiring of consultant after consultant, the search for models, the search for someone who can "envision" a future for PPS schools, the "rubber stamping" of questionable after questionable programs, proposals, products and people are desperate actions of a Central Administration that simply does NOT KNOW HOW to do be accountable in the positions that they hold. They quite simply do not know what they do not know.
@ 2:31 - You hit the nail on the head - they truly believe they have the answers - they read the "research" and desperately try to apply the latest fad to put on band-aid after band-aid. PELA principals are leading their schools from their captains chair, never leaving their offices, but collecting "evidence" regarding instruction. This regime has no clue...
Minadeo is a perfect example of a decent school now on warning. PELA inspired. Stein was/is just as corrupt. When he was at Colfax he "recruited" gifted students from Minadeo. Our son was asked to attend Colfax no strings attatched. We declined, it seemed wrong.
It may indeed have been wrong for your family-- but many who left Minadeo did so out of genuine safety concerns.
Oh but how the powers that be praise Minadeo and the direction it has taken. Complaints aren't heard, just ignored. Many of the teachers were/are the same one's that have been there for years and demonstrated excellent results. When the PELA change occurred and scores declined for the past two to three years what does central office do? Send in more in-ept administrators for back up to blame the teachers and laud the leadership. It's so backwards and parents know it - especially the one's that are fleeting. Why are the administrators living outside of the city and sending their own children elsewhere - if they believe in what they are doing - walk the walk! I went through Pittsburgh Public and so have my 2 children. However, not sure my granddaughter will be attending in four years if things don't change for the better.
why do we keep beliving in Lane? She cant get it done. In any organization when its failing you start with a change of the top person. Why not her? Are we afraid to confront the obvious?
Lane's contract expires in Jan 2014...
The district really isn't run by Lane as she has allowed Lippert to make and influence major decisions. Let's hope the board is smart enough not to allow her to be voted in next or it will be more of the same. However, with three of the Board members leaving - will the decision for the next superintendent be made prior to their exit since the end of Lane's term is nearing? The search for the next superintendent usually begins months before their term expires.
French is the Deputy Superintendent and as such she is the next in line for Superintendent.
Lane chose French over Lippert for that position. Why?
How has this choice influenced the relationship between French and Lippert?
Didn't Lippert bring French into the District?
None of these three have the skills, experience or knowledge to lead the District.
Is there evidence to the contrary?
If I'm not mistaken, by law superintendents in Pennsylvania must have six months notice of non-renewal.
In other words, the ship will sail in one direction or the other in advance of the new Board members.
But new members could change demands and expectations.
Really?
What qualities would candidates need to change demands and expectations?
Who will then convince such candidates to run for School Board?
Yes, BUT will new members be in before the actual voting in of the next superintendent? Or will the current members be selecting the next person?
Today's paper says NOT.
Current board will renew her if she wants it, I'm sure. The question is if she wants it or not.
What we need are candidates who have knowledge and experience as a classroom teacher who worked their way up through the ranks as an administrator. Dr. Holley has proven herself and serves the children well because she owes no one. She never bit her tongue with Central Office or the PFT. She focused on students and that is what enables her to be a Board Member that our children deserve. As we secure potential candidates for several districts, they should be persons who have no allegiance to the administration or the PFT. Otherwise, our schools will continue on a path of failure. The question is who's available to serve?
With the recent departure of Paulette Poncelet and pending resignation of Lisa Fischetti, this is the perfect time to see if Solicitor Ira Weiss was telling City taxpayers the truth that the $140,000 featured in the Auditor General's report was based largely on unused leave time.
Post a Comment