My two sons – in their combined 12 classes today spent over two hours on homework issues during class time (taking away learning time from others) in which the VAST MAJORITY of students were African American who did not turn in homework during the week and were given a second chance on the weekend and still didn’t turn it in.

All students have a right to learn. All students learning should not be held up for students who choose not to attempt the work. All students deserve to have someone help them with their homework. If parents can’t do it – someone needs to help. BUT WE MUST STOP INTERRUPTING CLASS TIME FOR NEGATIVE BEHAVIOR. As it is, students in Oakland are cheated out of 14 semesters of academic advancement they would get if we had 7 periods a day instead of 6 – let’s stop the nonsense and allow students who are at school to learn to do so.

Why are the posters above even thinking that Mr. Chatmon’s position is a policy making job – that he is actually in a position where he can change or control anything? Do you think the title means anything? Do you think the pay rate confers power? Do you believe in Santa Claus??

Looking at his biography – is there a single thing about his history that could possibly make someone think I’m not correct in my posting above as to why he was selected? Does he look or feel like Michelle Rhee? Does he have a title of Superintendent of Schools?

He’s probably the perfect candidate for what he was hired for. Pacification. That is what OUSD is selling.

And another thing. Organizations like OUSD have a habit of deliberately hiring/promoting people they know they can get rid of easily. Especially when blacks are involved. I’ve seen that trick a hundred times – especially when liberals are involved. The last thing they want is a candidate who could ever stand up to them politically.

So your belief about Mr. Chatmon is just not reasonable. More likely he will be well paid to say only the party line and was selected because they believed he would do so and they can enforce it.

Yes, the problems do begin at home and they are systemic. Yet, we have kids with HORRENDOUS home lives that succeed in school and life. Why is that? Can we replicate it? Scapegoating parents (and kids) is convenient, but it IS NOT the whole story.

Likewise, appointing Chatmon in itself does nothing. However, I expect some pretty challenging conversation in the next 18 months. Conversation that challenges how resources (quality teachers, supplies, etc.) are provided. Conversation that challenges the ABSOLUTE STALENESS and IRRELEVANCE of much curriculum and teaching methods in some classrooms. Conversation that finally, finally calls out those who believe our kids can’t do it and yet are entrusted with their future – which is CRIMINAL.

Whether that conversation leads to any change won’t be up to Chatmon, it will be up to us. We will either point to poverty and poor parenting, or we’ll roll up our sleeves and do something about it. Chatmon and Smith need HELP. 40 years of structural nonsense is benefiting someone and I bet they won’t want to see it change.

It is a shame that despite ever-mounting evidence, many continue to cling to the belief that without more money or better parenting, this is the best we can do. I’d encourage anyone who feels this way to stay far away from urban education because you are the cancer that needs removing.

That is not to say that more money and better parenting aren’t needed. They are. It is to say, we are no where near our capacity with what we have. The public knows it and is increasingly unwilling to throw good money after bad. Districts nationwide are proving this all the time. Do good-get money. Suck – shut down. That’s what’s happening folks. I don’t like it, but people speaking with their feet and their wallets. Chatmon will be in a good place to call BS on the whole charade.

In middle school you will find another group of “unofficial” drop outs.

When the reported figure of 377 out of nearly 956 – the number is actually closer to 377 out of about 1200 students,

We need to solve the problem of drop outs, but we also need to reduce the birth rate when young black men are not married to the mothers of their children. If we graduate one black man who may even be college ready, who has had four children out of wedlock by age 20, we have a larger problem.

We need to lead our young men through high school free from parenthood.

Mr. Tony Smith, I supported you at first, however, this is proof that you have no idea what our students need to succeed in the classroom. I expected more from you and that is my falut. More race politics at work at the cost of our children.