So here they are: Piedmont and Lafayette school districts both teach much more material every year than Oakland Unified – and teach it during the day so that it is not done at enrichment time. I am not proposing that you can compare a white family, living in a 6 bedroom home and an income in excess of $400,000 per year with a family of color in a two bedroom apartment, living with a $30,000 annual income. The white family clearly has advantages that go beyond income – namely, the societal benefits that come with generations of highly educated, and systematically privileged lives

What I am saying is that these schools have a curriculum which teaches more in the school day than OUSD. We have high performing students, they have high performing students. We have low performing students, they have low performing students. I do know of two Piedmont Elementary Schools which gave 3 different families a list of tutors for hire who had helped other students who were behind. However, what if we used our dollars to tutor as you would in the more affluent areas?

There are Gifted OUSD students, but there are also highly motivated OUSD students who have not been identified as gifted. We need to find out how these school districts can incorporate so much more material in the school day. This is partially why the test scores can remain so high – by the time the material is tested on the standardized tests the students have heard the material at home and at school for several years.

Just thoughts – these are not solutions, we need to look at other areas that are achieving what we hope to achieve.

Our students of all colors and ethnicities are no less capable than those of higher performing school districts.

When I reread my previous post, I see a lot of the wannabe homeschooler coming out. We couldn’t do that with older son, because we didn’t have the education, training or experience needed to educate a kid with autism.

I don’t think that lack-of-challenge-for-gifted-students is a problem that’s unique to OUSD. I think it’s more likely that it’s a near universal failing of schools and districts. My parents faced the same thing when raising me and my siblings. I’m 49, so that was back in the 60′s and 70′s. That school district (*very* rural, four teachers and classrooms for eight grades) recommended that my parents send me to a private boarding school for the gifted. Ultimately, my parents decided that it would be better for me to continue living at home with my family.

We have State and Federal laws that give disabled students certain rights and benefits, and that makes my job as the parent of a disabled student much easier in one way. I can use those laws to get my kid’s needs met.

I wish we had similar laws for the gifted. Younger son was identified for the GATE program three years ago, but it seems to be little more than an ego-stroke for students and their parents. While I like and respect younger son’s teachers, they simply don’t have enough time or resources to do everything that could be done for their gifted students. And without the weight of law behind me, I can’t force the district to do any or than it’s doing.

So, my decision is to lobby my legislators for the laws I think are needed for gifted student education – with full knowledge that I’m going to have little or no influence. And do what I can to suppliment in the mean time.

It’s not ideal. I wish we lived in that ideal world, but since we don’t, we just have to do the best we can.

At the same time, I also expect the school district to live up to its responsibilities. This is not a one-sided deal. If the school district is not even trying to meet the needs of ALL of its students, then it is not living up to its responsibilities and we should not gloss over this fact by saying that it is the parents’ fault. In some cases, lack of parental involvement is the root cause of some of OUSD’s problems. Is it the cause of OUSD not caring about its high-performing students? I don’t think so.

OUSD has grown used to the fact that many parents will supplement their children’s education and actually has come to expect that parents should do so. Is that the price that I must pay to stay in OUSD? I guess that it is. The calculus for me then becomes at what point do I abandon OUSD because the enrichment activities and my involvment in my child’s education are still letting my child’s education down because the public education my child is receiving is so insufficient that I can’t bridge the gap? Think about the high-performing kids whose parents can’t afford extra enrichment activities or don’t have the time by virtue of their multiple jobs to ferry their kids to such activities. Shouldn’t the school district be doing something for these kids?

And in the end, is it in OUSD’s self-interest to ignore its high performing students? I wouldn’t think so. I would think that the district would want to keep as many kids in the system as possible, given the overall waning enrollment numbers. And, I would also think that OUSD would not want to lose by attrition some of its higher performing students.

I do want something done right, Sue, but sadly in this case I actually can’t do it myself.

Yes, the school district also has a responsibility. And if they aren’t fulfilling their responsibilities to our kids, then we parents – and taxpayers – need to advocate for our children. We have to hold the district’s “feet to the fire”. Because nobody else is going to do our job for us. If we don’t care enough about our own kids, why should anyone else care at all?

Maybe it *ought* to work some other way, but this is how the real world works. I have friends in the Albany school district, one of the better ones in the bay area, and they have to do the same things to advocate for their Spec. Ed. kid that I have to do in OUSD for mine. It came as a real shock to them, because Albany had been doing very well for their older child who didn’t have serious learning issues. While they waited (for years) for their district to serve their child’s needs, very, very little happened. Once they turned from receivers-of-services into advocates-for-services, their work and stress levels went way up, but so did their child’s progress.

If we expect someone else to take care of our responsibilities, we shouldn’t be surprised if the job isn’t done as well as we’d like, or surprised when it’s not done at all. Like Grandma used to say, “If you want something done right, do it yourself.”

I agree, somewhat, with you. However, a free public education does mean “education”, and not childcare. I expect my child to be challenged educationally. If the expectation is that parents step up to do this for the school district, then they can pay for my membership in museums, parks, enrichment courses, etc. so that I can do this.

Rather than make excuses for the school district we should all expect OUSD to step up to the challenges of education ALL of our children. How much longer can we be expected to serve as “enablers” to the school district. What’s next? A 12 step program for OUSD?

If you think your child’s needs are not being met, it is YOUR responsibility to do something about it. Inside or outside of the constructs of the educational system you choose to use. If that means OUSD loses the $8K because you decide it’s not working for you, so be it. Seriously. It’s your child, it’s their developmental needs, and ultimately it’s your responsibility.

If you honestly believe what you said about my job being the education of my child not the school’s responsiblity, then I will begin scheduling museum activities, travel plans augmented with learning assignments, classical music concerts, foreign language movies, etc. during the school day. It would provide the education that would fit my child.

It would also take away the district / school average daily attendance money. I would then be taking the responsiblity you claim I should take, also use a classroom space and OUSD would be off the hook.