Be Informed
Be Heard
City School Budget:
A Community Discussion on Setting Priorities
Tomorrow, Thursday May 19th, Dr. Lane will address the community about the impact of the proposed state funding cuts on PPS' existing financial challenges and explain the scale of the spending cuts that must be made.
Difficult decisions are ahead. This is your chance to hear directly from the superintendent and participate in the priority setting.
Join a very important community discussion tomorrow:
Thursday, May 19, 2011
Pittsburgh Federation of Teachers Building
10 South 19th Street, 15203
South Side
Click here to RSVP
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
14 comments:
Looks like no time is given in the above announcement. This one has 5:30 - 8:00 listed, usually this time frame means a light dinner first:
http://pittsburgh.eventsburgh.com/city-school-budget-a-community-discussion-on-setting-priorities/
Did anyone attend that can report what happened?
Oh, Yes! Very interesting! It will be on the PPS website with the documents that were used. (It was video-taped by the District.) There will also be an opportunity for anyone and everyone who is a taxpayer in Pittsburgh to participate in the survey that was done (using clickers with immediate results posted on the screen).
Everyone is encouraged to participate.
Will post the website and the email address tomorrow although it should not be difficult to locate.
A follow-up session will be held on June 27th.
Pittsburgh schools entral office, transportation cuts supported
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/education/s_738106.html
Thank you for the comic relief!
5/19/11 1l:52, survey says... Glad that you shared that the survey will be available to all. The results of the "clicker" response should prove informative, but I hope is it accompanied by a breakdown on the responders. A+ makes great outreach efforts lately.
To 6:52: You were correct to ask about the responders (on the clickers). A+ has each one identified by name and sign-in.
But the "interesting" part of the poll, (since most of the group identified as "educators" were central office administrators) was that, to say the least, the percentage of people asking for "CUTS of central administration" corresponded to the remaining percentage of responders. In other words, it appeared that everyone in the room who did not identify themselves under "educator" voted to "cut central office administrators" as the #1 priority!
Anonymous 8:49, hope to hear more from you reporting on the A+ sponsored event. Really glad you gave that explanation. The details are important.
In these economic times we need to be creative as we talk of trimming expenses. Any central office cuts in the management ranks should not prove to be a hard hit for all with many having built strong resumes here in Pittsburgh.
Yes, it is particularly hard times in education, even for those who have built strong resumes. The problem with some who have strong resumes is that IF there is an interview process, these resumes will not suffice as a replacement for expertise, experience, or demonstrated ability to lead effectively___ or the capacity to answer questions from a strong knowledge base in educational administration related to their current job titles. Their lack depth will be easily revealed in the interview process.
Again to 3:53 -
The A+ poll, I think, will need some revisions as in some instances (based upon discussions) the questions were not clear enough and, depending on how you read the question, the possible answer by the same person on a single question could be diametrically opposite.
We made this point to A+ personnel, so hopefully, there will be clarifying revisions.
The highlight not mentioned in the news is that it was a unanimous priority among those gathered NOT to CUT instructional programs and structures that would directly impact, negatively, the academic achievement/education for students.
Finally, the most important question remains: Was this an exercise in futility? Does the polling process for those gathered to discuss and brainstorm in good faith, mean that their voices will be heard or did it occur so that Administration could claim community involvement in the process?
The previous A+ polling process held at Ebenezer was given little, if any, consideration by PPS administration.
Question,do the final budget has to be cleared by Broad i just thought that i throw that out there
other than that we should go ahead
and just OUTSOURCE the BUDGET of
PPS what do we got to lose?
Was the previous polling done by A+ under this admin?
Yes, done by or through them.
They run what looks like a lovely meeting the first time you attend. You feel "heard" and that all the concerns were noted, etc.
Attend more than one and you start to realize that it's what the person above mentioned -- they don't want feedback and they don't want to change their plans.
They merely want to say that they "engaged parents and the community." At most, the information collected will be used to put a different spin on the same old plans. It's marketing, not engagement.
Not that I'm bitter or anything. :-p
A+ Schools are funded by the foundations that currently support PPS. That is just one problem. The other problem is that there is no accountability or obligation for PPS to follow any suggestions, recommendations, or priorities gathered from the public at large. The information gathered via the polling at the A+ meeting to prioritize a process for selecting the next superintendent was totally ignored by the District.
It is NOT the Pittsburgh citizenry who currently determines what will happen in PPS, but, rather the BROAD/GATES alliance which is controlling the the educational agenda vial stipulated use of the grants and funding provided by them and in conjunction/adherence to and with the BROAD training provided to PPS Administration and Board Members.
Post a Comment