Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘School’

Under a Bushel

Posted in education, Gifted, In the News, School, tagged , , , , , , , on February 28, 2011 | 5 Comments »

Congratulations to Montgomery Blair High School!  Blair was honored on February 16 with the Maryland Excellence in Gifted and Talented Education (EGATE) award. It is one of just five schools statewide—and the only high school—to receive the prestigious award, which recognizes outstanding gifted and talented education.  MCPS actually issued a press release!  For those readers outside of MCPS, Blair’s Math Science and Computer Science program is a perennial of rival of Fairfax’s Thomas Jefferson High School for most Intel wins.  The school also houses a highly regarded communications arts program.

Here are the application requirements for an award to the school.  ALL criteria must be met to qualify:

  • Administrator shows leadership in expanding/improving programs and services for gifted and talented students in the school or school system.
  • Administrator allocates resources (time, people, money) to expand and improve gifted and talented education programs and services.
  • Administrator leads the expansion or improvement of parent, community, and/or business partnerships that directly support the education of gifted and talented students.

But wait!  There hasn’t been any mention of this on the school’s own website.  No announcement on the school listserv.  Nor in the school’s award winning paper.  What gives?  Isn’t the school justifiably proud of the award?

Hmmm.  Well there is this story in Silver Chips.

…Student Member of the Board of Education (SMOB) Alan Xie spoke with members of Blair’s Students for Global Responsibility (SGR) about the Gifted and Talented (GT) label Today. SGR is working with the countywide organization Montgomery County Education Forum (MCEF) to remove the GT label in elementary schools across the county.

Student Member of the Board of Education (SMOB) Alan Xie met with Blair’s SGR after school today.
According to SGR sponsor George Vlasits, the club is currently working to inform Blazers about how the Montgomery County Public School (MCPS) system begins separating students in second grade. After seven-year-olds take a test, they are sorted into the GT track or the non-GT track. “The [non-GT] kids get very little opportunities,” Vlasits said. “They would like to try more challenging material but those things won’t fly.” According to Vlasits, due to a discrepancy in teacher expectations, it is hard for students not on the GT track to get into magnet middle schools or magnet high schools. “If [non-GT] are constantly told they cannot perform as well as GT kids, they will eventually believe it,” he said. “It gets back to what we do early on….”
Ah, it’s our good friends the MCEF, they of the “no labels, no limits” campaign!  (I’ve written about them in the past, such as here.) I don’t know about you, but it strikes me as rather…icky…to have a club adviser pushing a personal agenda through a student group.   Particularly one that essentially is about sowing divisiveness in the school’s community.
Worse, Mr. Vlasits’ comments are patently wrong.  “They would like to try more challenging materials but those things won’t fly.”  Fly by whom?  Please!  Last time I checked there is no gatekeeping for accelerated and enriched instruction in MCPS (some would argue that’s the problem).  Any student or parent of a student showing the willingness and interest for more advanced instruction ask for it and get it.  Not there is a lot to ask for–we’re essentially talking accelerated math instruction, and in future that is going to be ratcheted back now that MCPS has decided that it over-accelerated in the past.  Plus a smattering of William and Mary.  So please show me this “GT Track” because I and other GT parents haven’t been able to find it in the 10+ years I’ve been around MCPS.  Instead we hear over and over and over again that GT identification is completely meaningless.  (40%+ identified as GT.  Thanks MCPS!)  Is he talking the Centers for the Highly Gifted perhaps?  Well, that program is there to meet the legitimate needs of outlier students whose needs can’t be met in a regular classroom.  Kids who would otherwise be bored and alienated in school. Is that what he’s advocating?   Denying the right of every student to learn something new every day?  Because it seems like the total elimination of all honors, magnet, Center, accelerated etc. etc. classes and programs is the only thing that will satisfy.

Read Full Post »

Let’s Talk About Choice

Posted in education, In the News, tagged , , , , , , on June 19, 2010 | 4 Comments »

In the reportage following the rejection of the Global Garden Public Charter School, the comment that leapt out to me was one made by Superintendent Jerry Weast on the issue of “choice.”  I wanted to be sure it was transmitted correctly, so I dug around to find his actual words. [Note: the MCPS website's Watch Meeting by Agenda Item feature continues to be an utter fail for this Mac/Firefox/Safari user.  Thank you Parents Coalition, for independently recording board meetings and putting them up on YouTube.]

So what did he say?  (Watch the video here.)

As you know, you are charged with providing an education to students throughout the county, one of the things charter schools are charged to do…I’ve been a proponent of charter schools…in fact I tried to start a KIPP school, if you remember, back when, even to helping furnish the facility and training Alison Serino (sp.?) as the “Kippster” and that didn’t …you know so it isn’t, ah…but it’s business. And you are in very lean budget times. And in very lean budget times you have to share your revenues with other schools. So we look at things about school choice and there’s over 150 private schools in our community, and so there’s choices, and there are our 200 schools with all their thematic approaches. Choice is something that is in abundant supply in Montgomery County.

Wow.  I call bullshit.  The trying to start a KIPP school?  According to someone closely involved with the earlier Jaime Escalante charter school effort, “There was a verbal agreement that MCPS would honestly move towards bringing a KIPP school to the county.  One of the Escalante organizers even traveled to New York City with Superintendent Weast to visit a KIPP school.  A lot of talking took place, but nothing concrete ever developed.  End of story.”  Other sources report that the effort failed because Weast insisted on having the power to appoint the KIPP charter’s principal, rather than the KIPP organization. Understandably, they demurred.   But in the Gazette the other day, an MCPS spokesperson is quoted as saying

“This idea that we’re anti-charter is just not reality; that’s not the case,” said Dana Tofig, a spokesman with the Montgomery County school system.

Tofig also said Superintendent Jerry D. Weast supported a “Knowledge is Power” Program that intended to start a charter school in the county in 2004. But the deal fell through when KIPP, a national network of nonprofit charter schools, decided against moving forward with the plan, Tofig said.

Show me a news story, press release, memo, letter, speech, comment in the media, board minutes, anything, that shows Jerry Weast forthrightly supporting a KIPP charter school in the county.  Show me one example of him exerting his considerable national starpower and local arm-twisting clout to make known his desire for a charter school to happen in MoCo, let alone initiating a concrete step.  Please.  Because I have done The Google and there’s nothing there.  If he really wanted it to get done, we would have heard about it, no?  [Note: To read posts from last year about starting a charter, click So You Want to Start a Charter - Part 1 and Part 2.]

But I didn’t even mean to get hung up on the KIPP thing.  What really grabbed me was the claim that the presence of 150 private schools in the county constitutes “choice,” as do all the “thematic choices” of MCPS’s 200 schools.  I heard that and thought, “Did he really just say that?”  What kind of choice, I have to ask, is Holton-Arms, tuition $29,450?  Oneness Family School, tuition $19,175?  Grace Episcopal Day School, tuition $20,000?  Georgetown Day School, tuition $29,830?  If you can even get in.  If the schools are even in your vicinity.  Assuming you don’t have a deep commitment to the idea of pubic education.  The idea that these schools present a “choice” for the average MoCo family is breathtaking in its arrogance.

So let’s move onto the Montgomery County “choices.”  Certainly MCPS offers more choice than my little town in New England did, which was two elementary schools depending on where you lived, one middle and one high school.  What are the “choices” in MCPS?   (I’ll focus on elementary, as that’s where the charter applications are aimed.)  Well at the early elementary level, there is one GT magnet for the entire county, Takoma Park ES. Assuming your child makes the GT cut and you are outside of the TPES boundary, it is then a lottery for a tiny number of seats at this waaay down county school.  So choice?  Not much.  Then there are the language immersion programs–yes those pesky “boutique programs” that Mr. Weast either loves or threatens depending on the audience.  Check DCUM for the angst surrounding the odds of getting into those, and again, whether they are geographically accessible to families who want to attend (Sorry Olney).  Finally, the Centers for the Highly Gifted which serve small numbers of a special population.  And that’s it at the elementary level.  With the exception of the Centers, what do they all have in common?  Wait for it:  the exact same, to-the-letter MCPS test-test-test curriculum.  Where’s the choice in that?

“But wait!”  I hear the MCPS PR person say. “Each MCPS schools offers a comprehensive program of instruction to challenge and meet the needs of all students. Some schools also offer special programs for students attending the school. These are called local school programs.” (I confess, I got that straight off the MCPS website.) I get it.  That would be things like the whole school communications arts magnet at my neighborhood school, the arts integration program at another area school, the technology focus at another, etc.

  • Problem number one is, that not every school has them, and in these budget times, those that do have them are under threat. (My local school saved its special program teacher by cutting the math content specialist position.)
  • Problem number two is that these programs are super secret. The MCPS website instructs parents to “contact each local school for details.” (Just what parents want to spend their abundant free time on, right?  You have to be really switched on to ferret out the details.)
  • Problem number three is access.  Nice for me if I have an artsy kid and I live in the arts integration school’s catchment area. But if I don’t, if it’s the next school over, too bad.  MCPS is not going to let me transfer just to access that program.  Transfers are only for extreme hardship.  Which means that “choice” in MCPS boils down to moving houses and hoping for the best.  Really no choice at all.

At middle school you’ve heard my rant.  Where I live, if you don’t get into a GT magnet, and you don’t win the middle school consortium lottery, well sucks for you.  You’re stuck.  You literally have to move, which people do.  Or homeschool, a choice that families back into as a least worst option.  I guess that’s Jerry Weast’s version of choice.

So what is his game?  One theory is that he’s trying to trying to link charter schools to private schools in the minds of people who don’t really get the charter school concept and who already  think that charters can select students, don’t follow certification and union requirements and take money from public schools like vouchers.   Not a bad theory.  Mine?  The desire for absolute control.

P.S.  You can read an op-ed by the Global Gardens Public Charter School founders in Sunday’s Washington Post.

Read Full Post »

The Budget Cuts Ahead

Posted in education, Gifted, School, tagged , , , , , , , , , , on June 6, 2010 | 4 Comments »

And so the school year is ending with a whimper.  On Tuesday the Board of Education will vote on the the FY2011 Operating Budget, working from proposed budget cuts put forth by the Superintendent.  Chances are very good that Board will accept them.  Here’s what’s very likely ahead:

  • Class Size Increase -  1 additional student per class over last year’s class size. Consequences include combination classes (where two grade levels are combined) in elementary schools for math and reading.  Middle School and High School will see fewer course offerings due to the cut in staff.
  • Academic Intervention Teachers – Reduced by 24. Total staffing will be 110 for FY2011.
  • Special Program Teachers – Reduced by 12.9 (Specific staffing cuts at College Gardens ES, Sherwood ES, Piney Branch ES, Einstein HS, Poolesville HS, Wheaton HS, Thomas Edison are all mentioned in the memo. In addition, the 5 International Baccalaureate Middle School Years Programme schools will have their coordinators reduced from a FT position.)
  • Secondary School Counselors – Reduced by 6
  • Focus Teachers – Reduced by 9
  • Reading Initiative Teachers – Reduced by 8
  • Reading Teachers – Reduced by 5
  • ES Paraeducators – Reduced by 27
  • Staff Development Teachers – Reduced by 10.4

The allocation of many of these positions will be determined by the Community Superintendents. Schools apply for these positions by submitting a comprehensive plan and the Community Superintendents decide where these resources can best be utilized for maximum impact. Submissions showing excellent staff AND community support are viewed favorably.

  • Media Assistants – Reduced by 5.5 This impacts 11 elementary schools.
  • Maintenance Positions – Reduced by 6. Yep, increases the current backlog of repair orders.
  • Textbooks and Instructional Materials – 30 percent cut.
  • Elementary Class I Stipends and Activity Buses – Results in no extracurricular programs except for Chorus, SGA, and Safety Patrol (and PTA-sponsored programs such as Hands-On-Science and FLES).

At the middle school level, arguably the weakest link in MCPS and the one where the lack of gifted options in the home middle school is particularly acute, given the move toward heterogeneous “Advanced for All” classes in science and social studies. Here are some details:

  • Special Program Teachers – $830,038.  (Page 7) The reductions in middle schools include a 1.0 position decrease (a .2 position for each of the five schools) in International Baccalaureate Middle Years Programme (IBMYP) staffing and a .6 position decrease in immersion staffing (a .2 position for each of the three schools). FY 2011 is the fourth consecutive year of special program reductions at the middle school level. The five IBMYP schools will have their coordinators reduced from a full-time position to teaching one class a day. IBMYP coordinators will have less time to coordinate the unique courses for the program and less time to coordinate the personal projects each IBMYP student must complete. This reduction makes it more difficult for schools to reach the goals of the International Baccalaureate Organization.
  • Middle School Reform – $1,716,701.  (Page 10) The elimination of $1,292,031 in stipend funding for Middle School Reform cohort collaborative work will limit the time classroom teachers and paraeducators have to work together to design, implement, and evaluate effective instruction.  Work after school, on weekends and other non-duty days, or hiring of substitutes to complete tasks, will be limited. This type of work is challenging to complete in a single class period. Cohort collaborative work has been greatly valued by instructional staff and provides cohorts the time to create rigorous lesson plans and assessments that are challenging and engaging to students; determine re-teaching strategies for students who did not master the objectives in cohorts; examine student work and analyze individual student, class, and course data to determine students‚ mastery, identify trends in performance, and inform instructional planning; and identify and integrate a number of strategies to support differentiation and equitable practices in order to meet the range of student learning needs.

The latter is particularly worrisome for GT students.  MCPS’s mantra has long been “trust us, we differentiate.”  And for years frustrated parents have sworn up and down that it’s not happening.  On occasion they’ve been able to wrest a rare moment of candor from MCPS officials, an admission that yes, implementation of differentiation is indeed spotty; it’s a high level teaching skill and they’re trying to do the training to get there.  Well, that thread of hope seems to be breaking and what we will see in middle schools is “advanced” science and social studies classes with the entire wide spectrum of student abilities and teachers who are not receiving the requisite training and preparation time.

Still under the gun:  The Visual Arts Center.  So glad that the Post is finally giving this program cut some coverage. Kudos to parent advocate Sue Katz Miller and others who have worked tirelessly to stop the halving of this program, which will save MCPS a measily, paltry $65,000.  In a multi-billion dollar budget, this cut is just shameful.

[To keep up with some of the egregious examples of MCPS waste, keep an eye on the Parents' Coalition Blog].

Read Full Post »

Snow Days

Posted in Gifted, Home Life, tagged , , , , on February 11, 2010 | 6 Comments »

Well a crisp, sunny–bitterly cold and very windy–day is dawning here in Maryland.  We’ve gone from this:

to this:

Time to start digging out once more, although truthfully it doesn’t look as bad as Friday/Saturday’s snow.  Yesterday we broke the Washington, DC area’s 100+ year record for seasonal snowfall; we now stand at 54.9 inches.  And counting–more snow is due on Monday.

All in all, we’ve come through quite comfortably.  Never lost power.  Have had lots (too much) yummy food.  [Note:  there is nothing more satisfying to this Swiss-at-heart girl than eating cheese fondue while looking out the window at a howling blizzard.]  We watched Gosford Park and The Breakfast Club courtesy of Netflix Instant Watch. The latter, made in 1985, stands up amazingly well with time.  It’s a teen must-see.  We played Apples to Apples and Scattergories.  We did not play Scrabble.  M. refused because it incorporates two of her freely acknowledged least favorite skills: spelling and rapid mental math.  C., of course, loves Scrabble.  For the moment she will have to satisfy herself with a Scrabble game she is playing via snailmail (how old skool is that?) with her friend in Boston.

There has been much coverage in the Post (Online.  I confess we are those weasels who stopped our paper subscription in December) about the impact the loss of a week of school will have.  I’ve urged C. to check EdLine to see if her teachers were posting any assignments, but so far nothing. So instead she has knit a hat, has been watching who knows what on her computer and been reading American Pharaoh:  Mayor Richard Daley, among other things.  She has also been recovering for a wickedly painful muscle spasm in her neck that left her immobile most of Monday. (Too much leaning over her laptop screen?)

M., for her part, has  been working on her National History Day paper.  Have to confess I’m a bit worried about it. I don’t feel like she has clear idea of what she should be doing and of course, her copy of Writers Inc. and the Michael Clay Thompson book on writing a scholarly paper are at school. Not looking forward to working with her on this today.  I’m forecasting tears and frustration.

Frankly, I’d prefer snow.

Read Full Post »

The Junior Meritocracy: My Take

Posted in Gifted, Learning, tagged , , , , , , , on February 8, 2010 | 1 Comment »

Everyone’s weighed in on it, I may as well too.  I’m talking about “The Junior Meritocracy,” this month’s New York Magazine cover story.  The subhead is a tip-off to where the article is going:  “Should a child’s fate be sealed by an exam he takes at the age of 4? Why kindergarten-admission tests are worthless, at best.“

Things to keep in mind when reading/my take:

– The article is about that unique microcosm of craziness, New York City school admissions.  You can get a taste in one of my previous posts, on the documentary “Getting In.”

– This is generally NOT the situation for public schools in Montgomery County. (Private school in DC, from what I gather, different matter–the article actually quotes a post from DCUrbanMoms in which a mom is seeking test prep materials.  Trust me, the DCUM private school forum is in-tense.)  Here, GT testing happens at the end of second grade, when kids are (assuming they haven’t been red-shirted) 7-8 years old , as recommended in the article.** They take the Raven test, not even mentioned in the article, which comes with its own limitations. And there are, as the experts in the article recommend, multiple inputs, and multiple opportunities in a child’s school career to access “accelerated and enriched” instruction.  If anything, the situation in MoCo is so expansive that that’s what’s worrisome.  The 2009 2nd grade screening report shows that 38.7% of MCPS 2nd graders were identified as gifted and talented.  38.7%! Ludicrous.

(** the exception is testing for the Takoma Elementary magnet. Even if a child “passes” they still have to be selected via lottery.)

–Deliberate prepping, at this age, is wrong and people like Suzanne Rheault, “M.I.T. graduate and former Wall Street analyst,” are despicable (“I can understand people getting offended by 4-year-olds getting tutoring for these exams,” says Rheault when we meet in her Soho conference room. “But I’m not the one making them take them.”  She charges $500 for her WPPSI prep books.)

– Just because high IQ people don’t all go on to cure cancer, write Academy Award winning screenplays or solve conflicts the Middle East doesn’t mean that we should dismiss IQ tests out of hand.

– “Giftedness is a real thing, no question. But giftedness can be extinguished, and it can be nurtured.” So sayeth, Samuel J. Meisels, assessment expert and president of Chicago’s Erikson Institute, the renowned graduate school in childhood development.  And so sayeth me, not-an-expert.  At the end of the day, there is no getting around that gifted exists.  Author Jennifer Senior writes, ” So what do psychologists and educators think makes the difference between good and exceptional?  Opportunity, connections, mentors.”  Those are the externals that can benefit any child.  And “Perseverance and monomaniacal devotion, or what the psychologist Ellen Winner calls “the rage to master.” Creativity, a willingness to fail.”  The internals.  The neurons.  The raw stuff.  Whatever you want to call it.  And not every kid has it in equal measure.

Just draw the parallel to athletics.  As Laura Vanderkam writes, “If a kid has a growth spurt at age 15, he’s more likely to make the basketball team in high school than if he has a growth spurt at age 18, or just stays pretty short. That may not be entirely fair, since playing a sport can teach great lessons for life and maybe help with college admissions. But we don’t go apoplectic as a society about how unfair this is or, more ridiculously, try to claim that tall people don’t exist.”

– Even if you do away with tests and go to other “measures,” such as “observational assessment” you still need a) teachers/educators who know what they are looking at/for, b) it’s still a “snapshot.”  And even the marshmallow test is coachable.

Read Full Post »

The Myth of “Optional”

Posted in Gifted, School, tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , on January 19, 2010 | 11 Comments »

Thanks to the Parents’ Coalition, a January 8, 2010 memorandum from Superintendent Weast to the Board of Education has come to light.  In the memo, Weast answers some questions from unidentified Board members about his proposed FY 2011 Budget cuts.

I’ll leave aside the point well made by the Parents Coalition,

Pants, gifted education...not the same thing.

that the cuts to academic intervention teachers and paraeducators are not justified one way or another based on any studies or data.  I’ll even leave aside the non-answer to the question: “Please break down how the special program teachers will be reduced by school and program. Describe the specific impact of these cuts on each special program and school.

No, I’m going to focus on Question 7 (page 4), which asks about the impact on “each optional regular education program and impacted school proposed for the elimination of transportation.”  The answer, in a nutshell, is that transportation costs $942 per student, and yes, fewer students would attend if transport were cut but they would still have the “opportunity” to attend.  They would just have to get themselves there.  Oh, and yes, cutting consortia transport was considered, “but the consortia are not optional programs.  The school the student selects is the assigned school and transportation must be provided.” [emphasis added]

Pardon me if I am slackjawed. Consortia programs absolutely are optional.  As a commenter posted a few days ago, what really is the difference between Entrepreneurship & Business Management (Blair) and Finance, Business Management, and Marketing (Einstein)?  And no matter what, students can always opt for their base schools–they’re assured a place there.  They call it the Division of Consortia Choice and Application Program Services for a reason.

So can we get something straight right now?  Magnets and Center Programs and yes, I’ll got out on a limb and say that even the RM IB, are not “optional.”  They are part of the much vaunted MCPS “continuum of gifted services.”  They are for “students whose needs cannot be met at the home school.”  They are not some frill, some “extra,” some “goodie.”  Here’s what Policy IOA says:

Children with special abilities and talents are part of the human mosaic in our schools and communities. They typically learn at a pace and depth that set them apart from the majority of their same-age peers. Because they have the potential to perform at high levels of accomplishment and have unique affective and learning style needs when compared with others of their age, they require instructional and curricular adjustments that can create a better match between their identified needs and the educational services they typically receive. [emphasis added] (Section B)

For students who require a markedly different programming, centers for highly
gifted and other special programs including magnet programs will continue to be provided, and new programs will be developed as needed. (Section C 3 c)

Finally there is this:

The superintendent shall direct implementation of this policy and specifically shall ensure that every school has a program that meets its requirements. Among the specific actions the superintendent will take are the following:

8. Prepare budget requests that provide adequate resources to implement the policy

Of course there is lots in Policy IOA that has never been carried out–that’s why they wanted to scrap it.  However the fact remains:  You take away transportation and you effectively kill the magnets, centers and immersion programs.

Don’t let it happen.  Sign the petitions here and here. (Who knows if they’ll have any impact.  At minimum the comments are inspiring.).  And be sure to come to the Board of Education hearing on Wednesday night, 7 p.m.

Here’s a notice that’s been floating around some school listservs…  Please repost.

TOMORROW: WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 20th at 7pm

BOE Meeting on Proposed MCPS Operating Budget

Carver Educational Services Center
850 Hungerford Drive
Rockville, MD 20850

Testimony will include Blair PTSA co-chair and others within our cluster. We need your presence. Students are especially encouraged to attend. This is Civics in action!

Wear yellow to protest cuts in transportation for special programs. Wear red to support Blair. Wear both if you can!

Whether you can make it to the meeting or not, please write to the Board to let them know that these cuts are unacceptable and damaging to the integrity of appropriate academic opportunity for all students. Then continue to write to the County Council and your representatives in Annapolis.

Read Full Post »

Oh Never Mind: Update on Proposed Transport Cuts

Posted in Gifted, School, tagged , , , , , , , on January 18, 2010 | 3 Comments »

Remember how Superintendent Weast’s proposed FY 2011 budget cuts included cuts to transportation?

The original proposal listed:

Item H: Transportation for optional regular education programs -

Eliminate transportation to optional regular education programs outside normal attendance zones, including magnet, immersion, IB, high school consortia, and other special programs. Fees are not permitted for these services. This reduction would not impact special education transportation.

FTE – 65  $4,900,000

Well it appears that on Wednesday evening, at the last minute (6:54 pm?  9:54 pm? The details are hazy), word went out that “MCPS has taken the proposed budget cut for the DCC and Northeast Consortium transportation off of the table for this year.”

The MCCPTA’s cluster rep’s message continued:

My understanding is that the proposed transportation cuts for “other special programs” would include the Highly Gifted Centers (ours is located at Pine Crest ES and Oak View ES), the language immersion programs, the middle school magnet programs and the high school magnet/special programs. Transportation for students in the Middle School Magnet Consortium (MSMC), which is Parkland, Loiederman, and Argyle is only provided for students living in the base areas. Students from outside those three middle school areas must provide their own transportation starting with the 2010-2011 school year.

No doubt, someone realized that eliminating transportation for the popular consortium choice programs would have caused all kinds of parental freak out–and effectively kill the consortia.  Which may still happen down the road because they were not found to be particularly effective.

Which leaves those (sniff) expendable “boutique programs.”  Well, at least we now have some clarity:   Proponents of gifted education stand alone.

Question: If the idea was to “save” $4.9 million, and you take out the transportation costs for the consortia, how much is really being “saved” now?  Well, there may be a way to check.  Please refer to the MPCS Consortia Report 2009-4, prepared at the behest of County Council member Valerie Ervin (press release 11.28.08). Starting on page 28, the report breaks out the cost of consortium transportation, and for FY ’09 it was determined that  $856,397 in transportation costs could be saved by eliminating the high school consortia. Even adjusting to FY 2011 dollars, that seems low to me.  I would love to see detailed numbers on the remaining programs slated for transportation cuts.

Read Full Post »

Weast’s 2011 Budget: Protection Racket

Posted in Gifted, School, tagged , , , , , , , , , on December 28, 2009 | 5 Comments »

The Christmas/holiday/blizzard stupor is slowly lifting and as the New Year approaches, parents are beginning to focus on the resumption of school and with it, school issues.  Foremost, the Superintendent’s Recommended FY 2011 Operating Budget.   You’ll recall that the good Dr. Weast presented the behemoth $2.2 Billion (yes, that’s billion) budget in early December.  This budget includes no new initiatives or programs, but seeks an additional $106 million for expected increases in operational costs, including:

  • $15.8 million for increased enrollment and new school expenditures
  • $25.9 million for continuing salary costs and benefits for current employees
  • $33.1 million for increases in health insurance, life insurance, social security and other costs for current and retired employees
  • $30.9 million for Other Post Employee Benefits (OPEB), which safeguards insurance benefits for future retirees.

And if not approved?  Be prepared for cuts … oh and he’s provided a helpful list of cuts to programs and services most guaranteed to outrage reliably vocal parents.  Now I confess, I am not a numbers/budget girl.  Just ask Husband Dear.  So this budget stuff all sort of washed over me.  But I’m slowly getting it. And what I’m getting is that Jerry Weast is, once again, playing a cynical, cynical game.  His message to parents:   “Support our budget or something bad will happen to your magnets, your consortium and signature programs.”  And on cue, he dutifully expects us rise to his defense.  Shameless, really, when you take a look the Parents Coalition blog, where the question is rightfully being asked, “Where has all the money gone?“

So let me offer a new suggestion as to what might go onto the chopping block:  The Equity Team.  You might remember them from a previous post.

The Equity Training and Development Team (ETDT) in the Office of Organizational Development continues to focus on-1) building leadership staff capacity to lead for equity, 2) deepening capacity of OOD staff to explicitly infuse equity content and processes into all professional development programs and projects, and 3) providing direct services, consultation, and resources to support school-based and central services study and dialogue about the impact of race and ethnicity on teaching and learning. Schools receiving equity training must commit to at least a year-long program that is aligned to an equity goal in the School Improvement plan. Requests from schools for this long-term support has risen from five in FY 2005 to 66 in 2009 . In addition to working directly with several dozen schools, members of the Equity Training and Development Team also supported leadership teams in several central offices, including the Office of Special Education and Student Services and the Title I Office. Members of the team also supported a number of system project teams, including the Disproportionality Workgroup, the Equity and Excellence Process Team, and several M-Stat teams.

I don’t know exactly how much savings would result from its elimination (you can check the budget numbers for the Office of Organizational Development, of which it is a part, in Chapter 6 of the budget. (pdf)), but I nominate The Equity Team on the basis of the costs it has incurred in the past, namely the speaker fees for Glenn Singleton, the purchase of (I’m guessing) thousands of copies of Courageous Conversations About Race: A Field Guide for Achieving Equity in Schools (at $30/copy), MCPS staff participation in conferences with sessions with such titles as Rigor or Rigor Mortis: Reframing the White Construct of “Rigor” to Give All Students Access to Challenging Material that Embraces Multiple Perspectives and Experiences.

Enough with the hundreds of staff hours sucked up by book clubs and Critical Race Theory indoctrination of teachers. In tough budget times–with threatened cuts to student services–we don’t have the luxury of this kind of discredited ideological foolishness.

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.