Therefore, here are the paradigms that I think the Administration and Board must believe are true:
- Capital is free, therefore there is no hurry to sell excess facilities.
- Alternative financing is their right and the citizen's tax bills are not their concern.
- Educational excellence and choice is great, as long as it is provided via District 281.
- Competition is to be feared because the competitors are too good or the game is unfair.
- District 281 needs to be big or bigger to be great.
- District 281 is responsible for preventing other schools from entering into and strengthening our community, and using the buildings that our citizen's paid for.
Thoughts? Are my opinions regarding their paradigms correct or incorrect? What am I missing or incorrect about?
“Hi _____,
Here are some quick thoughts, many you have heard before:
- Olson and Pilgrim should be sold rather than pursuing more Magnets.
- Restrictions should not be put in place to prevent other schools from buying the sold buildings. Do we lack all confidence in our school’s ability to compete???
- If Olson and Pilgrim are to be held, the Cavanaugh and Winnetka Learning Center programs should be moved there for 2 yrs. Or 287 should move to these 2 bldgs, and just bus the kids that need it to the pool. Either would open Cavanaugh and Winnetka for immediate sale and access to much needed capital. And it will take a couple years for them to gear up their magnet(s)…
11 comments:
I'm responding to both this and your prior post.
What 281 forgets is that they are the legally constructed unit of government responsible for the education of ALL resident children. They are not a pseudo-corporation / non-profit organization even though they have created one to serve most needs.
They tax us all, and therefore should serve us all. The rich and those willing to sacrifice can always opt out for existing private instruction, including home schooling. But that's a choice. If 281 thinks they're losing too many students to these options, yes, respond. That's competition.
But to sit on idle, valuable assets like closed school buildings goes too far. By limiting choice, 281 is limiting the educational opportunities of all its residents. Yes, it's painful to watch enrollment drop even for unrelated reasons, remembering better days, maybe your own experience as parent or student in the District. But overall fiscal prudence for all taxpayers means yes, divest of unneeded assets. That's called taking responsibility.
Magnet schools are just one of latest "oh but we're improving now" concepts many Districts are and have tried trying to retain enrollment. Remember the 281 Technology Learning Campus?
Enrollment is a statistic, a symptom. Retaining enrollment per se is not an educational objective. The far left and the unions may believe that a that a janitor's son learns more sitting next to a banker's daughter, etc. But like forced busing showed us, the claimed synergy is never realized.
I think there are some districts in America that have decided to embrace Charter schools rather than fight them. Maybe 281 should consider this.
But again, 281's duty is to all of us, not some of us, and that duty clearly requires the prompt divestiture of clearly unneeded property.
Now, there must be someone out there that agrees with the District's desire to open Magnet schools and hold the property for a couple more years... I mean this was supposed to be a committee recommendation.
Your comments are totally anonymous if you don't sign your name. And I am very interested in learning more about how you view the situation. Please take a chance a post your thoughts... We are anxiously waiting.
Well, you know I'm in favor of magnets. Based on our district's experience, they seem to be delivering excellent results. Is there a maximum that we can sustain? Probably. But I think adding one or two more would only make our district more desirable as families make their decisions on where to buy.
And I'm always curious as to why those most opposed to magnets (proven success) are generally most supportive of charters (mixed results, at best)?
--Annie
Years ago Sunny Hollow closed, but reopened when enrollment picked up. Which was good because they didn't have to build a new school or overcrowd the others. Which is why Pilgrim Lane will not be sold. On another note; Not a fan of charter schools (mixed results). Knew of a few families that left for a charter school, returned to public school the following year and they felt that their kids were a little behind the other kids. Would need to see more results from magnet schools before I could make up my mind.
Public schools, magnet schools, charter schools, all are choices. One is best for a given student. None is best for all students. All can be said to have mixed results. The important thing are to maximize the choice for the parent at nominal cost.
I don't see why magnets and charters are mutually exclusive, since their approach is different.
Now, is 281 retaining Pilgrim lane to be a magnet school or not to be a charter school. Judging by the Board's public comments on this, I think it is clearly the latter.
TLC was a magnet program, popular, then suddenly vaporized by a diversity laser. Fool me once, ...
The thing I find challenging about Magnets is the complete lack of financial transparency.
Is the Magnet a District money maker, break even venture or money pit?
As I have posted before, I believe RSIS is a money maker or break even venture because of its low diversity and dedicated/giving parents. However, I have no idea for sure...
What is the real marginal cost of offering: Spanish speaking Teachers, Spanish Curriculum, Somewhat unique administration systems, cross district transportation, etc?
Is it a way to justify a bloated infrastructure and high paid administration? Or is it a way to provide choice and excellence in a cost effective manner?
As for the effectiveness of charters, that is up to the parents that choose them and the groups that sponsor them. If they are not effective, they will close. The best we can do as citizens is help find them a building that is not being used. Then they can put up or shut up...
For the RAS community to grow and prosper, it needs to offer more choices and alternatives than District 281 can offer. This is needed due to our incredible diversity. These can be smaller organizations with less overhead.
Also, what will keep District 281 effective and efficient if they do not have some outside competition?
You say you believe the district's one magnet is break even or a money maker, and then you throw out hypothetical extraneous expenses.
And you believe choice is good, but charter choice, not magnet choice. Again, look at the record of success in both programs and show me how the latter isn't a smarter area for growth than the former.
Re financial transparancy--do you care than you can't tease out, say, Forest Elementary's finances from the rest of the district's? As a parent and as a taxpayer, I think a school that produces great results is the whole point of public education. If there is incremental cost to create higher levels of success (and again, we don't even KNOW that, and I suspect not), so what?
Is the point to spend exactly the same on each student? Or to produce excellent students?
I agree entirely that choice and alternatives are what the district will need to be competitive moving forward. But I think there are economies of scale, accountability, and successful models that already exist within the district.
--Annie
Pleasssseeee don't go there with the Magnets/Spanish Immersion is soooo successful... After the number of demographics vs test scores graphs I have looked at lately... The reality is it is doing okay for the homogeneous demographics it has.
Let's leave it that RSIS teachs kids to be proficient in Spanish and offers choice. (ie an alternative to leaving the district) These have their benefits for RAS and the families that like it there and got in. And it may even be a break even venture or better. (Reminder: In general, I actually support RSIS.)
Now are charters better or worse than magnets ??? I am not the one to say. So let them get in and start running, then the individual community families can make their own judgement. I would be happier if I could tell prospective neighbors that we have a great variety of education options. (ie 281 and Charters) It may pull some of the folks back into the community.
Just a thought... It seems RAS thinks Charters are better than their schools. Otherwise why would they work so hard to keep them out ???
Next, I don't care as much about the financial differences between very similar schools, with similar teachers, the same transportation rules, the same curriculum, same admin systems, etc. Because they are the same accept for the directed funding that must be spent in the high poverty schools.
And of course I need to bite on these. "Proven Accountability and Successful...." What accountability or success? Have you been looking at the graphs? RAS is at or below state average in most categories. We must improve !!!
So we have the following argument for holding the property:
- May need the schools if enrollment increases.
And the following arguments for blocking Charters and pursuing Magnets:
- Uncertain of Charter results as compared to Magnet results.
- Trust District more than a charter
Am I missing any?
Any thoughts regarding why 287 did not use PLE and OE for the next 2 yrs? Maybe we would have needed to rent some cubicle walls for awhile. At least Winnetka and Cavanagh would have been available for immediate sale.
Does anyone know the name of a charter that has about 0% LEP, 7% Spec Ed & 10% Free and Reduced Lunch ? I would like to do some one to one comparisons. Thank
Here are my specific concerns about charters:
A) they have mixed results. It's not like we need to let one start and to learn how it will work. Minnesota is undergoing a major charters school contraction right now, because many have failed to produce results. Here's a fairly recent article analyzing results: http://www.startribune.com/local/stpaul/35109429.html
And here's one about how their financial oversight has been pretty rotten: http://www.startribune.com/investigators/75464082.html
B) I personally know two different ones (anecdotal? absolutely) where they failed in the first year because of totally inexperienced administration. GREAT ideas, passionate parental involvement, and abysmal management. They had to fold and the kids had two transitions in two years. We know stability is a big indicator for success.
Look, I'm a very satisfied RSI parent, and I don't want to beat this dead horse again. ARe demographics part of it? You bet, just as much as at any primarily white, middle-income school. I think it serves an important purpose and can be replicated. You don't. Pax.
And here's the thing: I think in some situations, with truly rotten public schools, charters can be a lifesaver. My ILs are in Georgia; if I lived there I would pick a charter over a public--traditional or magnet--in a minute. Even here in MN, I looked at a Montessori charter that seemed fantastic--teachers, facility, pedagogy. Imagine my surprise to learn it's since been closed due to lax oversight. RAS, despite a lot of abuse it takes around these blogs, receives excelent ratings for its ethical, fiscally sound management, and that gives a good base to create an innovative program.
I'll gladly point you to a charter in Minnetonka (though it could possibly be Hopkins district) that has what I've heard is a fine new SI charter, and they likely have similar demographis to RSI. And they seem to have good administrative staff, given their strong start. But could either of those districts supoprt an equally strong magnet--certainly.
I have deep reservations about charter schools--when they're good, they're very, very good. And when they're bad, they fail spectacularly.
FYI, looked like the last comment got posted twice. I deleted the first one. Hope I was correct.
Actually, I whole heartedly agree with you that RAS can create another successful Magnet. What I do not know is what will be the impact on the RAS neighborhood schools that need as much money and focus as they can attain?
Will it steal funding or add funding to these schools? Will it distract the Administration from focusing on these schools, to ensure their new show piece succeeds?
Only time will tell.
Post a Comment