I have to say I agree with Cynthia Elliott but I wish she had been more vocal about her disappointment with district finances in previous years of service. Liz Hallmark is also on the right train of thought. But why didn't they vote NO? What do they fear being indifferent and standing up for what they believe in?
The reality is that it is not that difficult to improve performance of elementary schools, by state standards. You simply have to improve ELA and Math scores on state exams. This is where the bulk of the criticism is focused. The problem is that the board does not work with "Internal" experts, such as myself, who have implemented district-wide intervention strategies that yielded 64% improvement in ELA and 50% improvement in Math scores for students in grades 3-8. The district couldn't get credit for the success because it came through my tutoring company, Excel Educational Services, Inc. There were also a few others companies that had good success as well!
I have offered to share my system with the district ""FREE OF CHARGE!" All I got from the board president were questions targeted towards discrediting our system and ultimately NO MOVEMENT! These board members have become obsessed with the believe that these "Big Events" are going to gain them positive recognition by the community, even though they are fully aware that these events will not make a substantive impact on student performance!
The media should spend less time talking to district officials and more time talking to folks who have actually been able to achieve substantial success with students in the district! UofR and Geneseo are definitely NOT in that category!
In my opinion, the school board president is continuing to act in a manner that supersedes his authority and overrides the powers & duties of the appointed superintendent. The superintendent has the credentials, knowledge and experience and is the instructional & operational leader of the district. All plans for school redesign, partnerships, etc. should come directly from the superintendent, and not the board president. The board'd duties are to write and enforce policies that support the efforts of the superintendent to improve the district. It is understandable why Dr. Vargas filed suit against the district for usurping his powers and authority. Proposals that promote partnerships with colleges and urban public schools have been a large failure in this country. Just look at the Eastern Michigan University/Detroit Public Schools failed partnership efforts, or a few others. It is safe to say the the East High School EPO is following in the same direction. It has had a very high staff turnover rate, unnecessarily high teacher salaries, and minuscule levels of student success. The Geneseo proposal defies "best practices" in every way. Combining 2 classes, 2 regular ed, 1 sped, and 1 TA. They fail to realize that most likely an ESOL teacher will be added, due to the consultant teacher SPED model. An additional SPED teacher may be needed to maintain compliance with SPED teacher caseload. This could mean 6 adults servicing this combination. This would cause total chaos! Not to mention a possible fire hazard. Educating students does not need to be this complicated! Another even more devastating factor is that these type of partnerships supports the Republican Education Agenda to SYSTEMATICALLY DISMANTLE PUBLIC EDUCATION! Before long, we will have our local colleges becoming charter school sponsors. Our school board president should immediately cease & desist from acting in a manner that is contradictory to rebuilding strong public schools by seeking to establish EPO partnerships that privatize public schools, in my opinion!
Howard,
A special election is the protocol. But in Rochester, who knows. He definitely needs to LEAVE the School Board with the rest of the useless crew!
All of this propaganda sounds good,but is nothing different from any other school that is going through a transformation process. What troubles me is that:
1) School Turn-around approaches do not require all of the personnel overhead that this project has included.
2) The District could have implemented this same model without involving the use of UofR, directly!.
3) Incorporating a superintendent for "1" building is an extreme waste of resources.
4) The UR, and other colleges should create a pipeline to access their resources.
5) There has been a complete turn-over of administrative staff from last year to this year!. The same prejudicial process was used in selecting these replacements that were used in hiring the first batch of so-called leaders.
6) The school was recently granted a 1-year extension of their state take over.
7) Why are we constantly hearing from Board President" Van White? He is NOT the Chief Executive Officer for the district and should allow the Superintendent(s) to do their trained, experienced, qualified and hired JOB! We don't need to hear anymore of his rhetoric. We need to her from experienced leadership of the Superintendent, without his input, oversight or censoring!
I was concerned about the fact that she never mentioned anything regarding engaging parents at a higher level, continuing to improve the Code of Conduct, classroom management training for teachers, etc. She also indicated that she was NOT going to hire any more building leaders that are not "instructional leader," but she was also NOT going to get rid of existing leaders who do not instructional backgrounds, such as gym teachers, speech pathologist, counselors who become administrators. Somehow she thinks she can provide them with some kind of training (more wasted tax dollars) to help them become instructional leaders. She is in for a rude awakening. In my opinion, by the time anything gets started good, she'll be gone with the wind! Rochester is just too complex for a "short-term" outsider. Especially since she seems to be bringing in more outsiders! HERE WE GO AGAIN!
Although I understand the Mayor's frustration and commend her efforts, I feel that she needs to surround herself with "true" educational experts who truly understand the educational situation the district continues to face. There are many of us out here that have experience and knowledge on how to turn around struggling schools but we get overlooked because we chose to remain true to our cause and NOT embrace the rhetoric of educational politics.
The focus on turning around schools and districts in receivership is very focused but practical. This District suffers from a systemic history of disconnected leaders and a school board unable to provide stability due to their lack of strong background in education and leadership!
I would advise the Mayor to hold an Educational Leadership conference and/or assemble a "Think Tank" group of non-traditional, non-political educators committed solely to the cause of turning around Rochester schools!
Re: “City school board wants more time to respond to Aquino report”
Can we just stop it? These people just dont know nothing about education. Who are we trying to fool? Rochester is a hot mess! Period!