On May 12th, The school board voted 4-3 to RE-AFFIRM its initial (March 11th) vote regarding boundary changes. As noted earlier, this vote was made despite documentation of over 500 community residents who voiced their opposition to the board's vote. Board members John Whalen, Jim McCourt, Terry Shimek, and Caren Diedrich voted against reconsidering boundary changes.
At this past Monday's school board meeting, board member Caren Diedrich indicated publicly that her grandchildren attend Bird elementary school. Now that this information is in the public arena, Ms. Diedrich's comments [regarding her vote on the Boundary decision], that, "Bird is over crowded, I need to get some children out of Bird." are far more troubling.
Many would say that this Ms. Diedrich holds a distinct personal interest in Bird school, and therefore she should have abstained from the Boundary decision vote. If Ms. Diedrich had abstained, the vote would have been tied at 3-3-1, opening the door for further discussion on the issue--and another vote. Perhaps one of the other 3 may have "seen the light" . There is no "I" in "school board" (of course there ain't no "we" either!). Ms. Diedrich was not speaking for her constituents--or even the school board; she was speaking for herself. Hear for yourself; play the video clip below.
Saturday, May 31, 2008
WKCE test results - spin not included.
Reader note: If you prefer your school information to be served sunny side up, you should probably not read any further. We subscribe to reality here. We're happy to point out sunshine and roses along the way, but we also believe you deserve the complete picture. We don't crop the not-so-good news out of the camera shot.
District administrator Tim Culver has issued a press release on the subject of the annual test scores (WKCE = Wisconsin Knowledge and Concepts Exam). He specifically identifies 4 areas of success and 3 areas of concern. Dr. Culver's job understandably is to point out any shimmer in such data to focus on the positives. As residents and parents, however, most of us want the straight scoop....an unbiased view of how are kids are doing relative to state standards as well as to area schools.
Some use the "not-so-positives" to point fingers at the teachers. We have to be realistic and understand that teachers teach to a curriculum. While certainly some teachers are better than others at enhancing the learning process, they all sing from the same song sheet, so to speak. Therefore, a better focus for areas of concern is the curriculum content itself. Additionally, some like to "spin" lower scores by pointing out the disparity in ethnic or socioeconomic demographics of one school district or another--or even v=between schools within a district. Again, we need to "keep it real". ALL of Sun Prairie's students are OUR collective students. The job of the school district administration is to find ways to enable all children to learn and grow equally.
With that as a preface, let's take a look at the scores. The state DPI focuses more heavily on scores of 4th, 8th, and 10th grade students. In the figures below, percentage scores represent the percent of students district-wide that scored as "proficient" or "advanced" on the WKCE tests. The District goal is for 90% of all students to score "proficient" or "advanced" in both reading and math. Decide for yourselves...how are our kids REALLY doing?
High School - 10th grade
As the table shows, when all 5 subject areas are considered, relative to the other 15 local school districts, Sun Prairie ranked 8th out of 16 (subjects ranged from 4th to 11th). Last year we ranked 6th. Last year 4 of the 5 subject areas had scores 12-13 %age point above the statewide average. This year only 1 subject ranked as high as 10%age points above the statewide average. The great news is that that subject was Language Arts (grammar/writing skills). The even better news is that, relative to the other 15 schools, our 10th grade Language Arts score ranked 4th of 16. Language Arts skills have been identified as a weakness by both state colleges and employers. The math score fell below 80% this year. Last year, all 5 subject areas scored above 80%. Considering only Reading and Math, 10th graders ranked 14 out of the 16 area districts. Considering the big "3" (which adds Language Arts), our 10th graders ranked 8 of 16.
For more information:
Read the 5-30-08 Wisconsin State Journal article comparing WKCE scores of area schools
Read District Administrator Tim Culver's Press Release appearing in the STAR
Read the 99 page Sun Prairie school district 2007 Monitoring Report
District administrator Tim Culver has issued a press release on the subject of the annual test scores (WKCE = Wisconsin Knowledge and Concepts Exam). He specifically identifies 4 areas of success and 3 areas of concern. Dr. Culver's job understandably is to point out any shimmer in such data to focus on the positives. As residents and parents, however, most of us want the straight scoop....an unbiased view of how are kids are doing relative to state standards as well as to area schools.
Some use the "not-so-positives" to point fingers at the teachers. We have to be realistic and understand that teachers teach to a curriculum. While certainly some teachers are better than others at enhancing the learning process, they all sing from the same song sheet, so to speak. Therefore, a better focus for areas of concern is the curriculum content itself. Additionally, some like to "spin" lower scores by pointing out the disparity in ethnic or socioeconomic demographics of one school district or another--or even v=between schools within a district. Again, we need to "keep it real". ALL of Sun Prairie's students are OUR collective students. The job of the school district administration is to find ways to enable all children to learn and grow equally.
With that as a preface, let's take a look at the scores. The state DPI focuses more heavily on scores of 4th, 8th, and 10th grade students. In the figures below, percentage scores represent the percent of students district-wide that scored as "proficient" or "advanced" on the WKCE tests. The District goal is for 90% of all students to score "proficient" or "advanced" in both reading and math. Decide for yourselves...how are our kids REALLY doing?
High School - 10th grade
As the table shows, when all 5 subject areas are considered, relative to the other 15 local school districts, Sun Prairie ranked 8th out of 16 (subjects ranged from 4th to 11th). Last year we ranked 6th. Last year 4 of the 5 subject areas had scores 12-13 %age point above the statewide average. This year only 1 subject ranked as high as 10%age points above the statewide average. The great news is that that subject was Language Arts (grammar/writing skills). The even better news is that, relative to the other 15 schools, our 10th grade Language Arts score ranked 4th of 16. Language Arts skills have been identified as a weakness by both state colleges and employers. The math score fell below 80% this year. Last year, all 5 subject areas scored above 80%. Considering only Reading and Math, 10th graders ranked 14 out of the 16 area districts. Considering the big "3" (which adds Language Arts), our 10th graders ranked 8 of 16.
Middle School - 8th grade
As the table shows, when all 5 subject areas are considered, relative to the other 15 local school districts, Sun Prairie ranked 11th (subjects ranged from 9th to 12th). Last year we also ranked 11th. Both this year and last year all 5 subjects ranked 4 to 8 %age points above the statewide average. Even though the Language Arts score ranked only 9th, last year we ranked 13th. This year 8th graders increased their Language Arts percentage by 2 points over last year. This is of note in light of the fact that half of the area school districts' Language Arts scores dropped by 4 or more percentage points.
Considering only Reading and Math, 8th graders ranked 9th out of the 16 area districts. Considering the big "3" (which adds Language Arts), our 8th graders ranked 11 of 16. Of interesting note is that of the 16 area districts, only Middleton-Cross Plains scored at least 80% (80%) proficient or advanced in Language Arts.
Elementary School - 4th grade
As the table shows, when all 5 subject areas are considered, relative to the other 15 local school districts, Sun Prairie ranked 9th (subjects ranged from 3rd to 10th). Last year we ranked 12th. Both this year and last year all 5 subjects ranked 4 to 9%age points above the statewide average.
Even though the Language Arts score ranked only 9th, last year we ranked 13th. This year 8th graders increased their Language Arts percentage by 2 points over last year. This is of note in light of the fact that half of the area school districts' Language Arts scores dropped by 4 or more percentage points.
Considering only Reading and Math, 8th graders ranked 10th out of the 16 area districts. Considering the big "3" (which adds Language Arts), our 8th graders ranked 10 of 16. Of interesting note is that of the 16 area districts, only Madison scored LESS THAN 90% proficient or advanced in Social Studies. Only Waunakee scored at least 90% proficient or advanced in all 5 subject areas. Cambridge was close with subject scores ranging from 89% to 100% proficient or advanced.
For more information:
Read the 5-30-08 Wisconsin State Journal article comparing WKCE scores of area schools
Read District Administrator Tim Culver's Press Release appearing in the STAR
Read the 99 page Sun Prairie school district 2007 Monitoring Report
Engaging the Community = Chastising Citizens who DO Care?
While the school board continues its quest on how to better engage the community, one has to wonder: by "engage" is the board intending the meaning "enter into conflict with" its citizens? Because the few times citizens have the courage to speak up about what they see, they seem to get lambasted.
OK, perhaps the few that do consistently speak up don't always sugar coat their message. But is that a reason to verbally slap them upside the head --or worse--ignore them? But perhaps the reason for these citizens' approach is their frustration at TRYING to speak to the board only to be perennially rebuffed. Has the board president ever considered talking one-on-one with the "troublesome" citizens? Is the board capable of listening and just once not simply voting against whatever these citizens speak about simply because they don't like the messenger? Once again, is THIS the role model these board members wish to be for our children?
At Monday's school board meeting, Roger Fetterly spoke out about what he (and many others who agree but don't wish to waste their time speaking to an unyielding board) believes to be overly generous contracts for administrators. Fetterly said,
Board President David Stackhouse's ivory tower response to Fetterly:
WHOA, Mr. Stackhouse. Your facts are grossly in error. SP-EYE has witnessed Mr. Fetterly stating similar concerns on this issue at numerous full school board meetings and finance committee meetings. He also attends many administrator compensation meetings...but the board NEVER asks his or anyone else's opinion at these sessions.
Furthermore...what is the purpose of the "public input" and "citizen presentation" segments at board meetings if not to speak to the board???
To be perfectly clear and accurate, input is taken committee meetings, but this board disregards those that believe differently. SP-EYE has attended these compensation negotiation sessions on occasion as well. In fact, citizen visitors to these meetings are treated quite coldly, making it clear that while state laws require that their attendance be allowed; they are tolerated, NOT welcomed.
It is unacceptable for you or anyone to use your board seat--to which no public response or rebuttal is allowed-- to mis-state the facts. You KNOW that this issue has been raised previously. You support all raises provided to administration and staff...we get that. Just try to remember that yours is ONE OPINION only, and that you represent the entire district.
OK, perhaps the few that do consistently speak up don't always sugar coat their message. But is that a reason to verbally slap them upside the head --or worse--ignore them? But perhaps the reason for these citizens' approach is their frustration at TRYING to speak to the board only to be perennially rebuffed. Has the board president ever considered talking one-on-one with the "troublesome" citizens? Is the board capable of listening and just once not simply voting against whatever these citizens speak about simply because they don't like the messenger? Once again, is THIS the role model these board members wish to be for our children?
At Monday's school board meeting, Roger Fetterly spoke out about what he (and many others who agree but don't wish to waste their time speaking to an unyielding board) believes to be overly generous contracts for administrators. Fetterly said,
"These contracts are overly generous. The people that are really doing some work in our society, putting their life on the line, are getting 3.5% increases and they get shot at every day. In every case, I don't think you're being realistic."
Board President David Stackhouse's ivory tower response to Fetterly:
"Why is it that you have to wait until the very end to say 'gotcha'? If you care about this district the way you say you do, you would have come to us earlier and shared your experience for the betterment of the district."
WHOA, Mr. Stackhouse. Your facts are grossly in error. SP-EYE has witnessed Mr. Fetterly stating similar concerns on this issue at numerous full school board meetings and finance committee meetings. He also attends many administrator compensation meetings...but the board NEVER asks his or anyone else's opinion at these sessions.
Furthermore...what is the purpose of the "public input" and "citizen presentation" segments at board meetings if not to speak to the board???
To be perfectly clear and accurate, input is taken committee meetings, but this board disregards those that believe differently. SP-EYE has attended these compensation negotiation sessions on occasion as well. In fact, citizen visitors to these meetings are treated quite coldly, making it clear that while state laws require that their attendance be allowed; they are tolerated, NOT welcomed.
It is unacceptable for you or anyone to use your board seat--to which no public response or rebuttal is allowed-- to mis-state the facts. You KNOW that this issue has been raised previously. You support all raises provided to administration and staff...we get that. Just try to remember that yours is ONE OPINION only, and that you represent the entire district.
Monday, May 26, 2008
Exactly What Do they Direct?
Got a minute or 2?
Go to http://www.spasd.k12.wi.us/web/glking/about and check out the titles of our school board members. These self-appointed titles also appear on their name placards at board meetings.
We elect 7 board MEMBERS. 5 are elected within the board to officer positions:
President: David Stackhouse
Vice-President: John Whalen
Treasurer: Jim McCourt
Clerk: Jim Carrel
Deputy Clerk: Caren Diedrich
Then we have DIRECTORS: Terry Shimek and Caren Diedrich
Directors? What? What exactly do they direct?
Why is the board giving itself titles that don't exist in statute or policy?
Is being simply a "Board Member" not elitist enough? Do we all need to have a fancy title to feel good about ourselves?
Once again...how does THIS affect student achievement?
Food for thought.
Go to http://www.spasd.k12.wi.us/web/glking/about and check out the titles of our school board members. These self-appointed titles also appear on their name placards at board meetings.
We elect 7 board MEMBERS. 5 are elected within the board to officer positions:
President: David Stackhouse
Vice-President: John Whalen
Treasurer: Jim McCourt
Clerk: Jim Carrel
Deputy Clerk: Caren Diedrich
Then we have DIRECTORS: Terry Shimek and Caren Diedrich
Directors? What? What exactly do they direct?
Why is the board giving itself titles that don't exist in statute or policy?
Is being simply a "Board Member" not elitist enough? Do we all need to have a fancy title to feel good about ourselves?
Once again...how does THIS affect student achievement?
Food for thought.
Sunday, May 18, 2008
Will the health benefits divide between Administrators and support staff be narrowed?
As past posts have shown, school district support staff pay a far larger share of their health insurance benefits than do teachers or administrators. Tomorrow (Monday May 19 @ 5:30 pm), the school board's Administratiove Compensation Benefits subcommittee meets to discuss/exchange proposals for the next contract between the School District and Administrators.
Although they can go into closed session on occasion, this is a public meeting and attendance will offer a window into the high-stakes negotiation tactics employed. Feel free to attend and see how hard our elected "leaders" bargain. Think the board will be as hard-nosed as they were on the boundary issue? Think there will be pizza or subs?
Download a copy of the Public notice
Although they can go into closed session on occasion, this is a public meeting and attendance will offer a window into the high-stakes negotiation tactics employed. Feel free to attend and see how hard our elected "leaders" bargain. Think the board will be as hard-nosed as they were on the boundary issue? Think there will be pizza or subs?
Download a copy of the Public notice
Friday, May 16, 2008
120 SPHS Students missing?
It's 9:00 am...do you know where your high school students are?
A "Concerned Citizen" was wondering about the recent numbers of high school students posted. Concerned Citizen (do you get a visual of the "Smoking Man" of X-Files fame?) asked a very simple question. Concerned Citizen pointed out that the official "3rd Friday" (of September) count of Sun Prairie High School students was 1733. Then, the March 2008 official total of 1674 students was released. Finally, High School principal Paul Keats issued a revised HS honor roll student count indicating the total was now 1613 students.
We understand that the boundary issue has weighed heavily on the minds of the district. Also put aside for a moment any questions of whether a reduction of this magnitude suggests we didn't even need a new school (current HS capacity is about 1816). Do we need to call an Amber Alert for the 120 SPHS students that are missing since September? Where did they go? Has Sun Prairie High become Sunny Prairie-dale High? Are there dark forces at work here?
Thanks to Alice Murphy, Assistant District Administrator for Instructional Programs, the mystery has been answered. Between September and January, we lost 41 students from the original 1733, taking it to 1692. Then 18 HS students graduated early in December, taking the total to 1674 students for the 3/31/08 count. The difference between the total of 1613 students (reported after the honor roll fiasco) and the 1674 (61 students) represents those students who received 1 or more "incompletes" for a class, thus excluding them from calculations to determine whether or not they were qualified for the honor roll.
Mystery solved. While it's clear that the number changes during the school year, we can say that as of May 1, 2008, there were 1670 students attending SPHS (9th: 461; 10th: 412; 11th: 411; 12th: 386). [Source: School Board mtg package enrollment information] An additional 68 students attend the SOAR, alternative high school.
Much thanks to Concerned Citizen for looking at the numbers in such detail! We only become more knowledgeable when we ask questions. Isn't that what we're teaching our students? One of the problems with computers and technology is that these wonderful databases only provide us with data based on the query we make (the age old IO problem). Perhaps, in addition to hard coding the honor roll criterion into the query, we might also want to ensure that the total count is based on ALL students, not just those without "incomplete " grades.
A "Concerned Citizen" was wondering about the recent numbers of high school students posted. Concerned Citizen (do you get a visual of the "Smoking Man" of X-Files fame?) asked a very simple question. Concerned Citizen pointed out that the official "3rd Friday" (of September) count of Sun Prairie High School students was 1733. Then, the March 2008 official total of 1674 students was released. Finally, High School principal Paul Keats issued a revised HS honor roll student count indicating the total was now 1613 students.
We understand that the boundary issue has weighed heavily on the minds of the district. Also put aside for a moment any questions of whether a reduction of this magnitude suggests we didn't even need a new school (current HS capacity is about 1816). Do we need to call an Amber Alert for the 120 SPHS students that are missing since September? Where did they go? Has Sun Prairie High become Sunny Prairie-dale High? Are there dark forces at work here?
Thanks to Alice Murphy, Assistant District Administrator for Instructional Programs, the mystery has been answered. Between September and January, we lost 41 students from the original 1733, taking it to 1692. Then 18 HS students graduated early in December, taking the total to 1674 students for the 3/31/08 count. The difference between the total of 1613 students (reported after the honor roll fiasco) and the 1674 (61 students) represents those students who received 1 or more "incompletes" for a class, thus excluding them from calculations to determine whether or not they were qualified for the honor roll.
Mystery solved. While it's clear that the number changes during the school year, we can say that as of May 1, 2008, there were 1670 students attending SPHS (9th: 461; 10th: 412; 11th: 411; 12th: 386). [Source: School Board mtg package enrollment information] An additional 68 students attend the SOAR, alternative high school.
Much thanks to Concerned Citizen for looking at the numbers in such detail! We only become more knowledgeable when we ask questions. Isn't that what we're teaching our students? One of the problems with computers and technology is that these wonderful databases only provide us with data based on the query we make (the age old IO problem). Perhaps, in addition to hard coding the honor roll criterion into the query, we might also want to ensure that the total count is based on ALL students, not just those without "incomplete " grades.
Tuesday, May 13, 2008
Boundary Issue Redux: Board Stubbornly Affirms Its Earlier Decision
As each board member philosophised their individual positions on the March 11th boundary decisions, it became clear where they stood. No vote was needed. Finally. Jim Carrel moved that the board rescind it's March 11th decision, which was seconded by board resident David Stackhouse. The roll was called:
In favor (of rescinding the decision): Stackhouse, Carrel, Camber-Davidson
Opposed: Diedrich, Whalen, Shimek, McCourt
And so it went; the motion to rescind failed 3-4. But let's backup a bit.
The agenda item began with countless members of the public once again imploring the board to reconsider the decisions made on March 11th ( http://sp-eye.blogspot.com/2008/03/sun-prairie-school-boundaries-finalized.html ). Another 62 cards were turned in from those people that did not wish to speak, but who support rescinding the earlier vote. A petition containing signatures of 500 community residents who also supported rescinding the decision was presented.
Yes, many of these folks had "said their piece" at previous meetings. But there was a different feeling in the air. This was not a bunch of "elitists" who simply didn't want their kids going to a different school. This was a community that organized, did extensive research into the issue and numbers, and presented their case firmly.
But most importantly, this group came forward offering to be part of the solution, rather than just voicing opposition. Loudly and clearly, these folks stated that they only wanted a temporary reprieve from the boundary decisions in order that the District take the necessary time to do this job right, rather than slapping on another temporary band-aid. They told the board that if, after properly researching all the issues, the board had clear data which indicated that moving their children made the most sense for the District, then they would abide by that decision.
This was also not just parents...but a number of teachers from Bird Elementary spoke out in support of rescinding the decision. Is this not the definition of community based, data-driven decisions? In most cases, board members need to wrap themselves around a board decision. Sometime, however, they do "get it wrong". (Have the 4 board members forgotten the Madison school board's school naming fiasco?). And in those rare instances, board members need to put on their big boy (and girl) pants and admit their error. They will be bigger people and garner much more respect for it. Unfortunately it's too late.
Some key highlight's from individual board members' soliloquies:
Jill Camber-Davidson: "This move has not just affected the kids, but the entire community. Free/Reduced lunches does not mean a problem child; it's just an indication of need or an achievement gap. There are studies that show obese children don't have problems with achievement. What's next...balancing the district's children for obesity?"
John Whalen : "There's nothing to say that was not said on March 11th. I didn't come here with my mind made up."
Caren Diedrich: [SP-EYE note: Warning. The following quotes have been rated at least PG-13. Ms. Diedrich didn't speak to the audience, she nearly screamed at them, all the while chastising them.] "This pretty much ruined my weekend. I'm tired of the pissing contest...move this kid here, move that kid there. I don't appreciate YOU [the parents who spoke] managing our schools. Bitch at us. He [Culver] manages the schools according to our direction. [after analyzing things] you left me with very few things that it could be [reasons for opposition]. Could it be that your kids just don't want to rub elbows with the Westside kids? "
Jim Carrel: "We 7 serve at the discretion of the voters. If we're doing something that alienates the community, then we're doing something wrong. I did not make condescending assumptions on why you did not want your kids to be moved' I came to you and asked. We didn't listen. We did this...the 7 of us...actually, just 3 of us. The question is not whether to rescind the decision; that is obvious. We are not balancing diversity by moving 13 kids.
Jim McCourt: "I don't think it's obvious. I haven't heard anything new. You can't assume a decision will be rescinded just because there are new board members. To think that [because 40 kids will be moving out of the District as a result of this change] that we'll re-think our decision? I'm not saying it's just a threat."
In favor (of rescinding the decision): Stackhouse, Carrel, Camber-Davidson
Opposed: Diedrich, Whalen, Shimek, McCourt
And so it went; the motion to rescind failed 3-4. But let's backup a bit.
The agenda item began with countless members of the public once again imploring the board to reconsider the decisions made on March 11th ( http://sp-eye.blogspot.com/2008/03/sun-prairie-school-boundaries-finalized.html ). Another 62 cards were turned in from those people that did not wish to speak, but who support rescinding the earlier vote. A petition containing signatures of 500 community residents who also supported rescinding the decision was presented.
Yes, many of these folks had "said their piece" at previous meetings. But there was a different feeling in the air. This was not a bunch of "elitists" who simply didn't want their kids going to a different school. This was a community that organized, did extensive research into the issue and numbers, and presented their case firmly.
But most importantly, this group came forward offering to be part of the solution, rather than just voicing opposition. Loudly and clearly, these folks stated that they only wanted a temporary reprieve from the boundary decisions in order that the District take the necessary time to do this job right, rather than slapping on another temporary band-aid. They told the board that if, after properly researching all the issues, the board had clear data which indicated that moving their children made the most sense for the District, then they would abide by that decision.
This was also not just parents...but a number of teachers from Bird Elementary spoke out in support of rescinding the decision. Is this not the definition of community based, data-driven decisions? In most cases, board members need to wrap themselves around a board decision. Sometime, however, they do "get it wrong". (Have the 4 board members forgotten the Madison school board's school naming fiasco?). And in those rare instances, board members need to put on their big boy (and girl) pants and admit their error. They will be bigger people and garner much more respect for it. Unfortunately it's too late.
Some key highlight's from individual board members' soliloquies:
Jill Camber-Davidson: "This move has not just affected the kids, but the entire community. Free/Reduced lunches does not mean a problem child; it's just an indication of need or an achievement gap. There are studies that show obese children don't have problems with achievement. What's next...balancing the district's children for obesity?"
John Whalen : "There's nothing to say that was not said on March 11th. I didn't come here with my mind made up."
Caren Diedrich: [SP-EYE note: Warning. The following quotes have been rated at least PG-13. Ms. Diedrich didn't speak to the audience, she nearly screamed at them, all the while chastising them.] "This pretty much ruined my weekend. I'm tired of the pissing contest...move this kid here, move that kid there. I don't appreciate YOU [the parents who spoke] managing our schools. Bitch at us. He [Culver] manages the schools according to our direction. [after analyzing things] you left me with very few things that it could be [reasons for opposition]. Could it be that your kids just don't want to rub elbows with the Westside kids? "
Jim Carrel: "We 7 serve at the discretion of the voters. If we're doing something that alienates the community, then we're doing something wrong. I did not make condescending assumptions on why you did not want your kids to be moved' I came to you and asked. We didn't listen. We did this...the 7 of us...actually, just 3 of us. The question is not whether to rescind the decision; that is obvious. We are not balancing diversity by moving 13 kids.
Jim McCourt: "I don't think it's obvious. I haven't heard anything new. You can't assume a decision will be rescinded just because there are new board members. To think that [because 40 kids will be moving out of the District as a result of this change] that we'll re-think our decision? I'm not saying it's just a threat."
Terry Shimek: "This is not necessarily the best solution, but it's an equitable solution. Did we choose the best process? No....but in the end it worked. The Bird folks presented some good information. We [board members] can't communicate [outside meetings] so I don't know if everyone read it all...but I think they all did."
David Stackhouse: "My goal has always been to support board decisions. But I disagree with this decision...it was a short term fix. As a district we need to make all our schools equal...to a point. I think we made a mistake and need to pull it back."
Sunday, May 11, 2008
SPHS Honor roll....a different view
The recent Sun Prairie High School Honor roll error has caused quite a stir. In fact, the news tidbit has been picked up by a number of news services: north as far as Eagle River, east to Sheboygan, west to Eau Claire, and even south as far as Chicago. Google "sun prairie honor roll" and see for yourself. Slow news day? Or was the information of value for some other reason?
What we have learned is this:
What we have learned is this:
- The "error" was that instead of printing out a list of students with a 3rd quarter GPA of 3.2 and above, the list included all students with a GPA of 2.0 and above.
- "We should have had 694 students that were listed as making the honor roll," said Sun Prairie High School Principal Paul Keats. "Because of the mistake we had 1,339 that were listed."
SP-EYE requested the corrected numbers from Mr. Keats and learned the following:
.......................Honor Roll......TotalStudents
12th grade:.........167...................358................47%
11th grade:.........171...................398................43%
10th grade:.........160...................400................40%
..9th grade:........196...................457................43%
____________________________________
Total...............694..................1613................43%
Certainly, the original list was a cause for concern as it meant that 83% of SPHS students had achieved a 3rd quarter average grade of about a B+ or better (standard grading for a B+ is 3.3 out of 4.0 GPA; SPHS uses 3.2 as a cut-off for honor roll).
What else does the information tell us?
If 1339 of 1613 students had a GPA of 2.0 or above (83%)
and the actual number of students with a GPA of 3.2 or above is 694,
then 1339 - 694 = 645...and that's the number of students with a GPA of 2.0 to 3.2.
The # of students with a GPA below 2.0 would be 1613- 1339 or 274 (17%).
How does all this stack up against a statistically "normal" distribution? 68% of students would be expected to obtain a grade of C (1.7-2.3). 13.6% would be expected to earn a grade of "B" (2.7-3.3". Another 13.6% would be expected to earn a "D" grade. Under a normal distribution, 2.2% of students would earn an "A", while another 2.2% would be expected to fail.
Thursday, May 8, 2008
Let's Not Discuss Our Dirty Laundry...
During the section on open records at Tuesday's school board working session, board president David Stackhouse asked community member Roger Fetterly if there was anything else he'd like to add. It happened so quickly, we still can't recall how the conversation turned to expulsion, but it did. Noting that there have been so many expulsion hearings, Fetterly suggested that the district should be informing people about expulsions. Stackhouse angrily asked, "Why would we want to [notify the public] about expulsions? Who would want to know that?!
SP Expulsions up 400%
Let's recap ( see http://sp-eye.blogspot.com/2008/04/expulsions-up-400.html )
There have been 16 expulsion hearings this year. There have been 15 expulsions. We're certain the 16th was also expelled, but we have to make a separate public records request to find that out, what grade level, and the reason.
Back to Stackhouse's angered response. Is Stackhouse maybe responding for the district and not as a member of the public? Who would want to know that expulsions are occurring? Maybe the same people that would want to know that a convicted (and released) sexual predator is living in their neighborhood? Parents worry about their children...and we know Stackhouse does too. If Stackhouse can step outside of his shoes for a moment and wear those of a new community member, or one considering moving here, he WOULD want to know if there were behavioral or violence problems in the schools.
So, expulsions are one of those family secrets that we acknowledge only privately. We solemnly pass a look to each other that communicates concern, but then we move on. Out of sight, out of mind. Not unlike your crazy aunt's drinking problems, or the cousin who continually is in trouble with the law. And in those cases, not talking about it might be a way of forgetting about it and moving on.
But these are our kids, too! We've expelled SEVEN middle school kids this year so far! Half of the expulsions so far are not even of high school age! These are barely teenagers! We constantly hear board members preaching that it's about ALL the kids. Does that mean the ones that are expelled too? Or have we given up on them? And what happens to a pre-teen child that is expelled? We still have a responsibility to educate them...usually by home tutoring at the taxpayer's expense. Oh we LOVE to use the word connectedness, and preach its importance. I'm sure those kids feel connected. Do students expelled from high school simply drop out? Maybe we'd like to know what happens to these kids. We understand the privacy element, but we CAN speak in generics without identifying students. And it's not like their peers don't know who got expelled and the kid magically disappears. People WILL talk. And the only way to dispel a rumor is to be open about what's going on. Newsflash! Deflecting the issue is only going to make people smell something wrong.
Out of sight, out of mind?
If a problem isn't on our collective radar screen, then how can we address it? This past Tuesday, board members identified the issues in the district that they wanted to work on in the coming year. Not a single one mentioned the rise in expulsions as an issue worth addressing. The only one that came close was Jim Carrel who alluded to seeing the influx of lower income families and the associated "behavioral demographics" the board has encountered via expulsion hearings.
Are board members aware, and just do not care? (because that is one problem) Or is the larger problem that a lack of information about expulsions precludes the issue from appearing on radar screens until some tragedy occurs?
We've spent taxpayer dollars to hire a Communications Manager to put more spin on school district issues than Rocket Roger Clemens used to put on his curve ball. So, why aren't we using this asset to turn this frown upside down? You cant just sell the good stuff. Maybe it's time the District put something together along the lines of, "Hey! You may had noticed that the number of expulsions has increased significantly. This is what happens after an expulsion (yada yada yada).
Madison is talking about the issue. So whay aren't we?
Think that you don't want to know about expulsions? That there's no story there? What about the kid from Madison who was expelled recently for bringing a knife to school--to cut an onion for a science project. He doesn't sound like Public Enemy #1. http://www.channel3000.com/news/1386173/detail.html
As a result of public outcry, Madison is now discussing a change to its zero-tolerance policy. (see http://www.channel3000./education/16042967/detail.html )
Reality Bites
OK...time out. Let's analyze that statement. We think we get the point that Stackhouse is trying to make. Certainly, expulsions for certain reasons (e.g., weapons) could alarm the public. We don't want to do that. Expulsion is one of those dark secrets we don't want to talk about...the unsightly stains on the unmentionables, so to speak. We might be OK with letting our freak flag fly, but who wants to have their marked boxers hanging out on the clothesline? Right? Last but not least we have the growing community to think about. If people think the schools are "troubled" with violence then they may be less inclined to mortgage their lives away to purchase a house in Sun Prairie. Or, to put it differently, "If I wanted to pay that much for a house where there are "problems" in the schools, then I'd just live in Madison." Right? There are a lot of Sun Prairie homes on the market, and we've all read about what happens when enrollment declines.
SP Expulsions up 400%
Let's recap ( see http://sp-eye.blogspot.com/2008/04/expulsions-up-400.html )
There have been 16 expulsion hearings this year. There have been 15 expulsions. We're certain the 16th was also expelled, but we have to make a separate public records request to find that out, what grade level, and the reason.
Back to Stackhouse's angered response. Is Stackhouse maybe responding for the district and not as a member of the public? Who would want to know that expulsions are occurring? Maybe the same people that would want to know that a convicted (and released) sexual predator is living in their neighborhood? Parents worry about their children...and we know Stackhouse does too. If Stackhouse can step outside of his shoes for a moment and wear those of a new community member, or one considering moving here, he WOULD want to know if there were behavioral or violence problems in the schools.
So, expulsions are one of those family secrets that we acknowledge only privately. We solemnly pass a look to each other that communicates concern, but then we move on. Out of sight, out of mind. Not unlike your crazy aunt's drinking problems, or the cousin who continually is in trouble with the law. And in those cases, not talking about it might be a way of forgetting about it and moving on.
But these are our kids, too! We've expelled SEVEN middle school kids this year so far! Half of the expulsions so far are not even of high school age! These are barely teenagers! We constantly hear board members preaching that it's about ALL the kids. Does that mean the ones that are expelled too? Or have we given up on them? And what happens to a pre-teen child that is expelled? We still have a responsibility to educate them...usually by home tutoring at the taxpayer's expense. Oh we LOVE to use the word connectedness, and preach its importance. I'm sure those kids feel connected. Do students expelled from high school simply drop out? Maybe we'd like to know what happens to these kids. We understand the privacy element, but we CAN speak in generics without identifying students. And it's not like their peers don't know who got expelled and the kid magically disappears. People WILL talk. And the only way to dispel a rumor is to be open about what's going on. Newsflash! Deflecting the issue is only going to make people smell something wrong.
Out of sight, out of mind?
If a problem isn't on our collective radar screen, then how can we address it? This past Tuesday, board members identified the issues in the district that they wanted to work on in the coming year. Not a single one mentioned the rise in expulsions as an issue worth addressing. The only one that came close was Jim Carrel who alluded to seeing the influx of lower income families and the associated "behavioral demographics" the board has encountered via expulsion hearings.
Are board members aware, and just do not care? (because that is one problem) Or is the larger problem that a lack of information about expulsions precludes the issue from appearing on radar screens until some tragedy occurs?
We've spent taxpayer dollars to hire a Communications Manager to put more spin on school district issues than Rocket Roger Clemens used to put on his curve ball. So, why aren't we using this asset to turn this frown upside down? You cant just sell the good stuff. Maybe it's time the District put something together along the lines of, "Hey! You may had noticed that the number of expulsions has increased significantly. This is what happens after an expulsion (yada yada yada).
Madison is talking about the issue. So whay aren't we?
Think that you don't want to know about expulsions? That there's no story there? What about the kid from Madison who was expelled recently for bringing a knife to school--to cut an onion for a science project. He doesn't sound like Public Enemy #1. http://www.channel3000.com/news/1386173/detail.html
As a result of public outcry, Madison is now discussing a change to its zero-tolerance policy. (see http://www.channel3000./education/16042967/detail.html )
In short, instead of getting all defensive about the issue--like there's something to hide or be ashamed of--let's put a plan in place to resolve the problem. And, as long as you continue to want to keep this quiet, there are those in the public that will make public record requests to ferret out the very information that you seem to not wish to share. These stories WILL get out. It's all a question of whether the district and the board wish to be PROactive or REactive.
SP-EYE supported the high school's strict approach to handling the fighting that was occurring last year. But new issues are occurring: weapons and drugs. The public has a right to know WHAT is happening in our schools and HOW the district is dealing with it. Consequently, cramming these skeletons in a closet is not the solution....everyone knows that eventually the closet becomes overfilled, the contents spill out, and all hell breaks loose.
School board members are elected BY the people to tell us openly what is going on. To say the least, it's a question of ethics when you don't share with us the not-so-good news. We're investing in our childrens' educations. School board members and administration staff are our "portfolio managers" per se. Wouldn't you want the person who invests your future to share more than just the good news with you?
Wednesday, May 7, 2008
The School Board Unplugged
Tuesday May 5th was the annual school board "working session" (read: no cameras or microphones) to establish Committee assignments and discuss individual and group goals for the year.
Of course there was pizza (looked like 4 medium pizzas and (2) 2-L bottles of soda (Pepsi and MUG Root Beer if you're interested). But very little was eaten. Oh...but we digress...we should talk about what happened at the meeting.
Carrel takes a new job?
The session began with brief member intros about themselves. The one note of interest was that Jim Carrel used most of his time to explain that he missed the earlier intros because he had to take a call. He has been contacted by a recruiter...a "headhunter"...and for some reason felt people should know that "this was the hiring phone call". Carrel concluded by noting that this was a great job because he "won't have to move and it will help with the people that get upset about [Carrel] not abstaining on checks [to his current (former?) employer, Johnson Controls].
Individual goals
An interesting session where each board member discussed his/her "hot issues".
David Stackhouse: Now that the high school space issue has been resolved, wants to focus on "something else", like connectedness, student achievement. Create enough opportunities for kids so that we're getting kids engaged and preparing them for their futures after high school.
Caren Diedrich: Interested in looking into, at least on a trial basis, same gender classes was done in Janesville. Review whether we are really maximizing education at the elementary level (this is the point at which we need to engage kids in learning). Consider starting a 4-yr old kindergarten program. Look into starting Spanish in earlier grades.
John Whalen: Interested in whatever it takes to get our kids to be the best students, the most highly educated, so that they can be successfully and eventually give back to the community.
Jim Carrel: Would like to see some new standards for building efficiency...more than just cost per square foot. Sustainability as more than an environmental issue, but socioeconomical concerns. Noting the changing behavioral and financial demographics within the district, wants to "level the playing field" for all students. Wants to better understand "how students get educated"...the education structure. Interested in continuing the community engagement process ("if it's a 10-mile walk, we've just gotten to the door"). Would like the high school to have a competitive debate team (corrected Tim Culver that forensics is not debating; debating is a category of forensics).
Terry Shimek: Primary concern is to provide value in all decisions we make. Cost not to be a deterrent; need to take care of current students' needs first. Look at more involvement for students in extracurriculars, particularly in middle and elementary schools. Expansion for talented & gifted students (note: Shimek's wife is a TAG teacher for the district). Would like to see SP have at least one National Merit scholar annually. More rewards for teachers that are really doing outstanding things. Fiscal responsibility - need to balance opportunity costs with buildings. Wants district to have a swimming pool.
Jill Camber-Davidson: Did not want one high school. Now that the decision has been made, how can we ensure that we can make it the best it can be and kids don't get lost. Agreed with Caren Diedrich; maximize education potential at the elementary level. At the community level, we need to heal the wounds which were opened during the boundary process. We need a better way for dealing with boundaries. When we talk of moving kids based on their parents' incomes, what message are we sending?
Board Committee assignments
It was hard to hear and Stackhouse flew through his assignments. What we gathered (will be announced at next school board meetings was:
FTT - Jim Carrel (chair), Jill Camber-Davidson, and _________
Human Resources- Caren Diedrich (Chair?) and Jim McCourt
Open Records
No board members had any questions. They all have this stuff down cold.
David Stackhouse made some sharp comments in response to a citizen whom Stackhouse had asked for input on the issue. Geee...do you want to offer some input on this issue? SLAM! More on that later!
Open Meetings
No board members had any questions. Predictably, Jim Carrel took the opportunity to defend that the board did not have to public notice their "dinner" during the WASB conference. As usual he got it half right. The board still needs documentation that no public business was discussed during said dinner.
Expulsion became a hot topic. We'll talk more about that tomorrow. Stay tuned.
Of course there was pizza (looked like 4 medium pizzas and (2) 2-L bottles of soda (Pepsi and MUG Root Beer if you're interested). But very little was eaten. Oh...but we digress...we should talk about what happened at the meeting.
Carrel takes a new job?
The session began with brief member intros about themselves. The one note of interest was that Jim Carrel used most of his time to explain that he missed the earlier intros because he had to take a call. He has been contacted by a recruiter...a "headhunter"...and for some reason felt people should know that "this was the hiring phone call". Carrel concluded by noting that this was a great job because he "won't have to move and it will help with the people that get upset about [Carrel] not abstaining on checks [to his current (former?) employer, Johnson Controls].
Individual goals
An interesting session where each board member discussed his/her "hot issues".
David Stackhouse: Now that the high school space issue has been resolved, wants to focus on "something else", like connectedness, student achievement. Create enough opportunities for kids so that we're getting kids engaged and preparing them for their futures after high school.
Caren Diedrich: Interested in looking into, at least on a trial basis, same gender classes was done in Janesville. Review whether we are really maximizing education at the elementary level (this is the point at which we need to engage kids in learning). Consider starting a 4-yr old kindergarten program. Look into starting Spanish in earlier grades.
John Whalen: Interested in whatever it takes to get our kids to be the best students, the most highly educated, so that they can be successfully and eventually give back to the community.
Jim Carrel: Would like to see some new standards for building efficiency...more than just cost per square foot. Sustainability as more than an environmental issue, but socioeconomical concerns. Noting the changing behavioral and financial demographics within the district, wants to "level the playing field" for all students. Wants to better understand "how students get educated"...the education structure. Interested in continuing the community engagement process ("if it's a 10-mile walk, we've just gotten to the door"). Would like the high school to have a competitive debate team (corrected Tim Culver that forensics is not debating; debating is a category of forensics).
Terry Shimek: Primary concern is to provide value in all decisions we make. Cost not to be a deterrent; need to take care of current students' needs first. Look at more involvement for students in extracurriculars, particularly in middle and elementary schools. Expansion for talented & gifted students (note: Shimek's wife is a TAG teacher for the district). Would like to see SP have at least one National Merit scholar annually. More rewards for teachers that are really doing outstanding things. Fiscal responsibility - need to balance opportunity costs with buildings. Wants district to have a swimming pool.
Jill Camber-Davidson: Did not want one high school. Now that the decision has been made, how can we ensure that we can make it the best it can be and kids don't get lost. Agreed with Caren Diedrich; maximize education potential at the elementary level. At the community level, we need to heal the wounds which were opened during the boundary process. We need a better way for dealing with boundaries. When we talk of moving kids based on their parents' incomes, what message are we sending?
Board Committee assignments
It was hard to hear and Stackhouse flew through his assignments. What we gathered (will be announced at next school board meetings was:
FTT - Jim Carrel (chair), Jill Camber-Davidson, and _________
Human Resources- Caren Diedrich (Chair?) and Jim McCourt
Open Records
No board members had any questions. They all have this stuff down cold.
David Stackhouse made some sharp comments in response to a citizen whom Stackhouse had asked for input on the issue. Geee...do you want to offer some input on this issue? SLAM! More on that later!
Open Meetings
No board members had any questions. Predictably, Jim Carrel took the opportunity to defend that the board did not have to public notice their "dinner" during the WASB conference. As usual he got it half right. The board still needs documentation that no public business was discussed during said dinner.
Expulsion became a hot topic. We'll talk more about that tomorrow. Stay tuned.
Saturday, May 3, 2008
Catch the School Board...Unplugged
If you attend ONE school board meeting, this is the one that you should attend:
See the school board with microphones and camera off (of course, seeing the agenda, this is probably the one meeting that SHOULD be shown on TV).
The agenda includes the following:
4. Individual and Board goals (Policy BA)
5. Committee assignments (who will chair which committee)
6. Liaison selection
7. Policy & procedure review
___A. BHA, New Board Member Orientation
___B. BHA-R, Board Orientation Procedures
8. Questions & answers regarding the following documents:
___A. Wisconsin Public Records Law
___B. Wisconsin Open Meetings Law
___D. 65.90 Municipal budgets
___E. 19.59 Codes of ethics for local government officials, employees and candidates
Issues such as Open Meetings and Open Records have plagued the school board both recently and in years past. This meeting will give residents an opportunity to see the board discuss how they plan to address these subjects. The only rule for attendance is that, unlike a routine board meeting, where the agenda provides opportunities for citizen input, this session is for the board members. But we do get to observe.
...and don't be discouraged by the fact that the meeting is being scheduled in a tiny conference room at the District headquarters. This meeting, like all other school board meetings (except those few which meet criteria for a closed meeting), MUST be a public meeting.
More importantly, there should be NO reason why the board should feel uncomfortable discussing these subjects openly. This doesn't have to be a touchy-feely kumbaya session. It NEEDS to be a frank discussion about the school board's legal and ethical responsibilities. And those are things, we, the public DO have a right to be in on. We encourage folks to attend this session. If the close quarters get cramped, the board should do the right thing and move it to Room 100, the District's large meeting room.
Do you think there will be pizza or subs??
o Tuesday, May 6, 2008 5:30 p.m.
o School Board work/study meeting,
o at the School District Office (Room 106)
o 501 S. Bird St., Sun Prairie.
See the school board with microphones and camera off (of course, seeing the agenda, this is probably the one meeting that SHOULD be shown on TV).
The agenda includes the following:
4. Individual and Board goals (Policy BA)
5. Committee assignments (who will chair which committee)
6. Liaison selection
7. Policy & procedure review
___A. BHA, New Board Member Orientation
___B. BHA-R, Board Orientation Procedures
8. Questions & answers regarding the following documents:
___A. Wisconsin Public Records Law
___B. Wisconsin Open Meetings Law
___D. 65.90 Municipal budgets
___E. 19.59 Codes of ethics for local government officials, employees and candidates
Issues such as Open Meetings and Open Records have plagued the school board both recently and in years past. This meeting will give residents an opportunity to see the board discuss how they plan to address these subjects. The only rule for attendance is that, unlike a routine board meeting, where the agenda provides opportunities for citizen input, this session is for the board members. But we do get to observe.
...and don't be discouraged by the fact that the meeting is being scheduled in a tiny conference room at the District headquarters. This meeting, like all other school board meetings (except those few which meet criteria for a closed meeting), MUST be a public meeting.
More importantly, there should be NO reason why the board should feel uncomfortable discussing these subjects openly. This doesn't have to be a touchy-feely kumbaya session. It NEEDS to be a frank discussion about the school board's legal and ethical responsibilities. And those are things, we, the public DO have a right to be in on. We encourage folks to attend this session. If the close quarters get cramped, the board should do the right thing and move it to Room 100, the District's large meeting room.
Do you think there will be pizza or subs??
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
