The presents are opened. Cookies eaten. Christmas movie seen (“Four Christmases“…not as bad as expected). Ham and latkes eaten (it’s complicated). So now I’m digesting and back to blogging.
So where were we in a situation that is now being called “Labelgate?” Well, just to recap:
- On December 16th the Washington Post published an article with the headline “Montgomery Erasing Gifted Label.” Citing anonymous “officials” the article discussed the “no labels” experiment taking place at two elementary schools.
- By midday Board of Education President Shirley Brandman and Policy Committee Chair Pat O’Neill issued a statement “correcting” the “impression” created by the Post that the BOE had already decided to end labeling.
- Later that same day Evie Frankl, Director of the Montgomery County Education Forum and a leading voice for the total elimination of gifted education and radical “de-tracking” in MCPS, e-mailed supporters celebrating the article and the “no labels” decision as “our first major-hopefully of many-holiday gift.”
- A week later, on December 22, letters to the editor responding to the article were published…including one from O’Neill and Brandman reiterating their surprise and emphasizing that “no decisions have been made.”
- The next day the Gifted and Talented Association issued a call to action outlining the six central issues pertaining to the revision of the Policy on Gifted and Talented Education (of which “labeling” is only one-see ), seeking MCCPTA’s position on them, and urging immediate parent action.
Then, as GTA parent advocate Fred Stichnoth writes:
On Wednesday, December 24, AEI rushed to enter the then nine-day old labeling brouhaha with its “Montgomery County Public Schools is Not Eliminating Gifted Programs Questions and Answers.” A few hours later, MCCPTA Gifted Child Committee Chair Susan Joyce Thomas helpfully posted AEI’s Questions and Answers on several listservs. Ms. Thomas helped us understand the labelgate timeline: AEI already was preparing its Questions and Answers when Ms. Thomas alerted AEI to parents “questions” (maybe GTA’s Issues and Actions Alert?); somehow the Post article fit into AEI’s motivation too.
It could not be clearer that the Post launched MCPS’ “officials’” trial balloon. Without a deep throat, we do not know how the BOE and MCEF figured into the launch. We do know that BOE President Brandman, Associate Superintendent Erick Lang, DEIP Director Marty Creel and AEI Director Kay Williams frequently attend MCEF’s end-the-label meetings.
MCCPTA’s role is as murky as it is vital. Is MCCPTA advocating MCPS’ end-the-label position by publishing MCPS’ justification while remaining silent as to any other position which might be MCCPTA’s own? Why has MCCPTA not kept its PTAs apprised of the six central issues surfaced by the AEI Advisory Committee? Why not respond to GTA’s Issues and Actions Alert?
Well I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. I suspect MCCPTA is “in the tank” with AEI and has already bought into the “no labels” policy shift.
Fred continues:
Parents would be naïve to think that comment during the public comment period (after the ELT and the Policy Committee have approved, and the full Board has tentatively approved, the Policy) will have any effect on the Policy.
MCCPTA knows that the formal (for-show) public comment periods that follow BOE tentative policy approvals usually are too short to accommodate input from local PTAs. Abandoning local input, crucial decisions then are made by a small group of MCCPTA officers.
We are anxious that the schedule is vague. A crucial comment deadline is January 15. The real decision will be made early by the Executive Leadership Team and the Policy Committee. Local PTAs must weigh in. MCCPTA must divulge its position. Leisure is the luxury of the naïve. Now is the time.
Amen.
