[speedgibson] Speed Gibson: Asked and Answered
Email subscription to blog articles
speedgibson at lists.powerblogs.com
Tue Apr 21 23:19:07 EDT 2009
Posted by Speed Gibson:
Asked and Answered
http://speedgibson.powerblogs.com/posts/1240370343.shtml
I was at a public group dialog between the District 281 School Board
and representatives of the Robbinsdale Federation of Teachers (RFT).
Most of that time was spent on communication, and most of that on the
"40 teacher" issue. The Referendum blitz had said passage would allow
the District to rehire up to 40 teachers to lower class sizes.
Since passage of the 2008 Referendum, a Facilities study showed that
three buildings could be closed, not one. This was done. The resulting
efficiency, load balancing, and some better demographic data that came
with the study allowed the District to reach the desired class size
targets with well under 40 more teachers. The union steward claimed
this was driving general mistrust of the Administration by the union
and by the community. You can read between the lines without my help.
We also heard the RFT's concern that the District just wasn't prepared
to handle a surge in enrollment the RFT thinks is quite possible.
Better to hire a few more teachers now just in case than to scramble
later. And one teacher seemed convinced that some classes would have
to be held in the hallways, that the District had downsized too much.
Let's broaden this beyond the union. We've been hearing similar
comments from the community at large for some time, especially at the
public forums for closing the three buildings. Many said it was a
conspiracy, with the District deliberately hiding key facts.
Folks, to borrow a phrase, we have to get over this. We have to move
on. The buildings are closing. And those teachers in waiting that
would bring the rehire count to 40 will have to wait another year at
least.
Let's take this supposed enrollment surge. Professional demographer
Hazel Reinhardt is wrong? Technology Director Dennis Beekman doesn't
understand all that attendance data he collects and analyzes several
times a year? The critics have no data of their own, no basis for
overturning the professional opinion and hard data on file.
Let's take the space issue. The consultants were wrong? Several key
District officials were wrong, including the Superintendent? The
School Board was wrong? People like me who went through the reports in
detail were wrong? Again, critics, what did we all miss?
Let's take the this 40 teacher business. OK, let's hire the dozen or
so more to reach that number. Where do they go if all the bases are
covered, i.e. the desired class size targets are achieved. It would
have to be a subjective decision as to what subject areas would gain
headcount. The departments left out would soon be complaining that the
wrong subjective decision was made. We've seen some of this already
with Elementary Art. And at the end of the school year, what student
testing could tell how many teachers were rehired?
District 281 has been very busy these last 18 months. After some
initial turmoil, it now has a Strategic Plan, a Facilities Plan, a
successful Referendum, and a new Superintendent come July. En route,
the three questions I listed have been asked and answered, many times,
by qualified people, many of whom will have to live with the
consequences if they're wrong. Yet some insist on pressing further
until they hear what they want to hear.
To borrow that phrase again, can we move on? Is this the sort of
pointless dialog we want to burden a new Superintendent with? As one
Board member put it, ask yourself: what's my role in this? To wallow
in misinformation and minutia? To complain past decisions? To repeat
or encourage others' dissatisfaction? Or take a positive step to put a
stop to this, as I'm trying to do here.
Look, this District still has issues, serious issues like a pronounced
demographic achievement gap. This is what the new Superintendent
should be working on, not having to rehash old complaints.
More information about the speedgibson
mailing list