When asked what is working in Special Education, consistently gives the same tired example of a successful life skills program at Oakland Tech. He clearly doesn’t have a vision grounded in concrete and comprehensive knowledge of the experiences and work of staff and Special Needs families throughout OUSD.

He ceremoniously makes the same tired speech that “we are no longer talking about the Special Ed budget ‘encroaching’ on the General Ed budget” and that he oversaw that change in language when he arrived. What’s the point of switching the language when the attitude and practice remains the same? He pits “these kids” against “those kids.” He allows for his most senior staff to fix its own error through the removal of whole categories of staff support, the further burdening of tragically already overburdened Special Education teachers and a dramatic reduction in the services available to students.

What he supported in the last June meeting of the School Board was the virtual implosion of Special Ed through the disrespectful and radical elimination of an entire group of crucial specialized staff at the most sensitive time of the year, the wholesale and district-wide consolidation of Special Education classrooms, and the intention to mainstream without any plan for supporting students and teachers. And then he has the gall to say at the Board meeting that he might have gotten it wrong on the one item about eliminating program specialists. Appreciate the honesty but, “Did he consult anyone on the ground?! Did he ask his staff to do so?!” The answer is clearly NO. Or, the outcomes were known but ultimately irrelevant. Either is unconscionable.

All of us—parents, staff, students, community partners–were blindsided by the decision to engage in massive cuts and impose a “re-structuring plan” sold at the last minute as a reform. So insulting to call this a vision of “inclusion” when all those affected were so absolutely excluded.

To put it optimistically: Tony Smith has a lot of trust to re-build with the families of children with Special Needs–and we attend every single school and live in every region of this district.

His record on Special Education and on supporting children with Special Needs: a failure.

It is not the size of the classroom or the school – in school districts in which the majority of students are planned and the parents are educated class sizes are often 32 beginning in first or second grade and elementary schools often top 1,000 students. These schools are high performing and because they are larger with larger class sizes often have teacher specialties such as foreign languages, separate science, art and music teachers, book clubs, math clubs, and science clubs in elementary schools. There is one principal, one vice principal and two office personnel. For a similar number of students Oakland has two to three principals, one to three vice principals, one to five security personnel, four to six office personnel, no foreign language classes, no science or art teachers and no book club, math clubs or science clubs.

Jim Mordecai

My recollection of events past on the issue of small schools regarding OEA’s role is the same as you stated.

AI recall oncern OEA leadership had with small school movement was that the funding was soft money and the movement was not sustainable.

Jim Mordecai

I don’t think the teacher’s union advocated for small schools. I believe OCO –which was in alliance with the OEA in the fight for smaller class sizes– who went on its own to convince the board to pursue a small schools agenda.

OEA has consistently argued that OUSD doesn’t put the state-mandated minimum percentage of funding into the classroom implicitly asking for fewer principals etc per student. Implicitly that will come up against small school plans.

Business as usual in OUSD administration…. hire your family and friends, milk every penny you can find, push the latest wacko educational trend, destroy kid’s futures and drive AWAY anyone who attempts to speak rationally and truthfully about the cluelessness of the leadership….. then… BLAME THE TEACHERS.

http://www.ibabuzz.com/education/2009/05/20/so-who-will-it-be/

Negatives: His plans to implement his vision are a disaster. There are 2000 initiatives in OUSD. He’s appointed some people who are incompetent and toxic. I have seen outstanding teachers, administrators and entire schools leave/succeed from the district. They’ve been pushed out, told to leave, while the incompetent, grasping for power stay and are promoted. Furthermore, Smith has been unwilling to engage in dialogue about what’s going on. He talks about relational trust and doing “this thing” together and yet he’s alienated those who would have quickly joined him.

Decision-making is all centralized, top down; major critical decisions are made sometimes by one person and there are no reasons given for what happens.

I have one more year in this district and then I’m out and I’m pulling my kids from OUSD schools.
I had huge hopes for Smith. Very sad.

The schools are the Post Office with yellow delivery trucks.

Keep dreamin’.