Comments on: More details on Oakland principal reassignment notices

By: Starshaped

Starshaped — Thu, 17 Feb 2011 18:56:49 +0000

I think the district is being very foolhearty in all their doomsday predictions. Scared teachers and principals are ineffective teachers and principals. The brain trust which is the district, is sending out years of service records through the mail to teachers’ and principals’ homes on Friday and expect them back to the DO by Wednesday. Hello! Monday is a holiday, limiting the mail service by one day already. Not to mention the cost of stamps to send these out. Why weren’t they given to principals to give to their staff and then given back to the principals to bring back to the district? This is the kind of idiocy happening down there.

Moving teachers and principals around helps no one. Many of us are invested in our community. Ripping us out of our community is gaureenteed to hurt our communities, no matter where the communities are. I’m hoping beyond hope that all this drama is mere scare tactics like many of my collegues are saying they are.

What the district needs to do first is to dismantle sites with multiple administrators like at TCN and ICS. Its a drop in the bucket, but it would be less messy than getting rid of a bunch of highly invested teachers who love their school communities. I have moved sites a few times and it literally takes 2 years to feel really connected to a school. I would be devestated if I was moved from my school.

By: J.R.

J.R. — Thu, 17 Feb 2011 18:29:13 +0000

Lacy,
I’m sure you have heard the phrase “A leopard cannot change his spots”, well that applies here. Those who do not see education as important, necessary, and life changing will not be cajoled or nursed into it. No amount of money,resources or support will help what truly ails this community. People having kids that they cannot support financially,morally and emotionally. In short, broken families can only be healed from within. Get some core values,morals, and something to believe in and stick with it. Do not allow the taxpayers to take care of you and your progeny.

By: Lacy Asbill

Lacy Asbill — Thu, 17 Feb 2011 17:06:07 +0000

I appreciated hearing at the last school board meeting that discussions about school closures are veering away from strict and one-dimensional discussions about low-performing schools, and instead are being set in the context of larger concerns about creating a quality school in every neighborhood. Continuing to close west Oakland and flatland schools is not a long-term solution to educating our community, even if these schools are low-performing. I DO think that this is the year to make some tough decisions about the number of SUSTAINABLE schools in OUSD, and I DO believe that fewer, better resourced schools would be better for our students on the whole. However, I’m sick of seeing schools filled with low-income students of color attacked for their educational outcomes without receiving the wrap-around support and meaningful restructuring they need to be successful.

By: TheTruthHurts

TheTruthHurts — Wed, 16 Feb 2011 22:59:43 +0000

Closing and reopening schools in the same neighborhoods every 5 years also isn’t a sign of genius.

By: livegreen

livegreen — Wed, 16 Feb 2011 21:38:29 +0000

EO Teacher, I’m not sure what OUSD should wait and study some more? I think you make the point for EOSA and any school performing at or below the same level to be closed.

For those that are scoring higher, well, there’s more to study. But just because another school’s situation needs to be studies or carefully considered doesn’t mean ALL the schools need to be studies or considered.

By: EO Teacher

EO Teacher — Wed, 16 Feb 2011 21:20:01 +0000

I agree that ineffective small schools need to be restructured, consolidated, or closed. But what defines ineffective?
Take EOSA, one of the schools that the court of public opinion says should be closed.
According to Ed-Data, their African American (largest subgroup) API is 540.

Let’s compare that to the large high schools:
Tech: 533
O-High: 546
Skyline: 591

One could make a case that all 4 of those schools are ineffective, with EOSA not being the worse of the bunch. So if it’s a cost – effectiveness analysis, yes you have a point. EOSA is getting the same outcomes by arguably costing more money. But let’s be real careful about crucifying the “ineffective small schools.” In most cases they serve their population no worse than the large high schools. And in some cases they serve them better.
Life Academy is a prime example – Latino API is 658, which is 100 points higher than Oakland High’s Latino API,

If the critique is expense, call it that. The ineffective argument is moot in OUSD, where the “best” schools are still undeserving minority students.

By: livegreen

livegreen — Wed, 16 Feb 2011 20:28:54 +0000

Thanks for the follow-up and clarifications, Katy and Troy.

Separate but related: It’s time to start planning which ineffective small schools should be closed. Right now. It’s better to aim the cuts where there are failures, than share them by cutting schools, programs and teachers that are effective.

The Gates Foundation isn’t around any longer and we shouldn’t be paying for the empty baggage they left us with. Question: Where does Tony Smith, especially given his background, come out on this?

Can’t OUSD measure successful vs. failed small schools well enough to know where the failures are right now? (Without hiring more consultants to tell us which schools, when the grades and test scores are already available).