So last night, the unelected, unaccountable State Board penned a note, and sent the State Board President and a member (who’s running for State Rep) to come and lecture us on how we are failing our schools while they sit on a board that’s failing our entire state. #hypocrisy

It was, as they said, an uncommon move. After hearing the audience jeer, I would say that it should probably remain uncommon.

Here’s the missive., full of accusatory innuendo and ZERO self reflection on their role in betraying students with a testing regime unmatched in modern times.

For good measure, upon completion, I took appropriate umbrage at the hijacked term: status quo.

Advertisements

10 thoughts on “So last night, the unelected, unaccountable State Board penned a note, and sent the State Board President and a member (who’s running for State Rep) to come and lecture us on how we are failing our schools while they sit on a board that’s failing our entire state. #hypocrisy

    1. MHS

      Couple of questions and an observation:
      Didn’t you guys essentially vote to do exactly what they were recommending? Work with DOE to develop an acceptable MOU? So why is that recommendation such a bad idea if its what you decided to do, its what Red Clay is doing, and it seemed to be what some of the other speakers last night asked for as well. Yep, I was there listening, my travel schedule doesn’t let me make many meetings since I retired, but I was able to make this one.

      More interesting in this letter is a reference to unused money for these schools? What can you tell us about why CSD didn’t apply for 1.5 million in SIG funding for your lowest performing schools? WHy did Bancroft not spend their PZ funds for two years? Couldn’t those funds have been used for after school programs, summer programs, more teachers to decrease class sizes? Why didn’t CSD pursue those opportunities?

      1. John Young

        No, red Clay super presented an mou not result of stakeholder input as substitute. We directed super to engage all stakeholders including DOE.

        So the state takes our entire year four grant money because we don’t play nice nice with their inane teacher compensation plan and then comes to our board meeting to declare we didn’t spend it.
        They. Are. Clowns.

      2. MHS

        John, don’t try to confuse people(unless of course you actually thought that PZ funds and district rttt funds were one in the same) – yes CSD withdrew from the final year of RTTT but that had nothing to do with the PZ funds for Bancroft! PZ schools were allocated those funds separately from the district’s RTTT allocation. So the question still exists why for two years did the school not spend the funds provided to it to address low performance and why didn’t CSD apply for 1.5 million in School Improvement funds- that could have really done a lot, you guys could have added more teachers for smaller class sizes, funded an entire summer program, after school program, etc…all things that do have proven backgrounds for improving student literacy levels and school achievement, especially in low income urban settings. So why didn’t the district use those resources over the past two years?
        So, I guess the question is did the CSD board know that Bancroft hadn’t invested those PZ funds in programs to support student learning? Did CSD board know the district decided not to apply for 1.5 million in additional funds? That could have more than doubled the funds for Priority schools and heck the district could have even dipped into the 25 million of reserves to make a real impact for those kids….

  1. Steven Fackenthall

    “We strongly urge you to engage with the Department of Education in partnership with parents, teachers and the larger community toward agreement on conditions for success, and ultimately a viable plan for school turnaround. ”

    Is that what THEY did when this process initially started? If so, what parents and teachers did they “engage” with? I call this grade A bullshit.

  2. It was total bad parenting. “Do as I say, not as I do.”

    It is insulting to compare TPS to Howard High School. Nowhere on our school websites will you find language like “selected for admission” as you will on Howard’s website. Our only requirement for admission: live here. Apples and oranges. Same goes for any city charter school that they would like to point out. Different rules lead to different outcomes.

    It is insane to assume that what works in our successful suburban schools will work in city schools, and vice versa.

    But it was a great photo op for a political campaign, wasn’t it?

  3. John Young

    MHS, we did not withdraw. The petulant DOE withheld: ALL RTTT funds including RTTT PZ allocation. Federal funds have consequences that accompany them and have never been proven to make schools improve. And when you make assertions like we have 25MM in reserves…well, you lose any credibility to you have. Positively thrilled to not have applied, nor received those funds. They are pernicious.

    MHS, you are just a liar. Straight up.

    1. MHS

      Not at all a liar – but can only go off the information reported on the school report. The balance was taken straight off the report submitted by the district located on the school profile page:
      http://profiles.doe.k12.de.us/SchoolProfiles/District/Default.aspx?checkSchool=0&districtCode=33&district=Christina
      It stated a balance of approximately $25 million, that is where the number came from if that reported information is wrong you should have it corrected. The profile pages are supposed to be (at least under Delaware code) the annual reports from the districts to the state…

      1. John Young

        Year end balance does not equal reserves you need a class in school financing Delaware On Oct 2, 2014 11:25 AM, “Transparent Christina” wrote:

        >

  4. Pingback: Video: John Young bitch-slaps DE DOE! | Kilroy's delaware

Comments are closed.