On another post Anonymous wrote:
"
http://www.post-gazette.com/opinion/letters/2013/12/06/Alternative-ed/stories/201312060091
The
link above concerns Clayton Academy and was written in response to the
recent PG article about the proposed extension of the management
contract for Clayton. I recall an EFA meeting where former
superintendent Roosevelt said he knew kids who were at Letsche who did
not want to go back to their home school at the end of their punishment
period. Do we really need Clayton at all? Seems that if we are
instituting austerity and closing or reconfiguring schools we need to
cut the Clayton contract.
"
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
The problem is that almost nothing initiated after Roosevelt arrived is affected by budget cuts, even if seriously underenrolled or not working out as planned. For example, how many districts are choosing summer camps over middle and high school sports (or apparently even art supplies), and does this choice make sense?
Letter in today's PG from 14 teachers at the Student Achievement Center:
“If they weren’t at Clayton Academy, where would those kids be?” The answer is right here at the Student Achievement Center, just as they have been since the 1970s..."
Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/opinion/letters/2013/12/06/Alternative-ed/stories/201312060091#ixzz2mhUyyGtI
It was never really clear how Clayton would be different from the SAC. The idea that Board members seemed to buy into was that there would be no more disruptive students in classrooms, allowing the disruptive students to get help and the other students to learn, but the level of disruptions does not seem to have decreased.
It is very unusual for PPS teachers to speak up like this. Teachers from other districts, like NYC and Philadelphia, often question their districts in the press (maybe they have stronger teachers unions there?), but not PPS.
PPS was a districtvthat solved its own problems--large enough to have SAC,formerly Letsche( formerly ed/med because OMG females were pregnant). We didnt need canned programs and consultants-- our admin and teachers knew our kids, our families, and the ability to see situation and work on it. SAC and many other programs worked well, but didnt line corporate education companies pockets
Amen! Amen! Amen! Thanks, 12:18, for stating so succinctly and accurately the former PPS approach for reaching all children in our District! We know our children, we care about our children and we know how to solve problems on behalf of our children.
The external interventions must go; they are part of the problem and definitely NOT part of the solution.
The part of the Clayton story that is really most fascinating is that the push for this provider came from a Pennsylvania legislator who would later be convicted of more than 100 federal corruption charges.
Post a Comment